Who are your 11-20?

[KobesAchilles]

We all know who the consensus top 10 are (no order): Kobe, Mike, Magic, Larry, Wilt, Shaq, Jim, Jabbar, Lebron, and Bill. Maybe some trolls have Kobe out of the top 10 and switch him with someone else (that's fine just tell us who you are replacing Kobe with). But who are the next 10 players? Everyone has their own list and their own criteria.

11. Moses Malone. 3X MVP. 13 time All-Star. Led Multiple teams to the Finals and won one in 83 along with a Finals MVP where he abuse Kareem. 31 points and 15 rebounds per game in his prime. He was arguably the greatest offensive rebounder of all time and he made your team a contender

12. Hakeem: MVP, All time Blocks leader. 2 time DPOY. Led league in rebounds. 2 time champion and Finals MVP. 12X Allstar and 12x All-NBA. He was arguably the most skilled big man of all time. It took the Rockets nearly 20 years to even sniff any post season success once he left.

13. Dr. J: He joined the NBA late but he was by far the best player of the 70s after Kareem. He had a flawless game, he scored easy, had every move in the book, he could create and defend. Dr. J was a mismatch against anyone he faced. He is a 3x ABA MVP and a NBA MVP. He won 2 ABA titles and 1 NBA title. He was an 5x ABA All Star and 11x NBA All Star. Had he played in the NBA from the get go he would've had far more NBA success. The dude was a straight baller and maybe the most underrated of all time

14. Charles Barkley. I know he doesn't have a ring, but Charles was a beast. He's an 11x All Star. MVP, led the Suns to their first finals since the triple OT loss to Boston. 11x All NBA. He led the league in rebounding. Charles was a match up nightmare. He was too fast and athletic for big men and too strong and imposing for guards. He has 11 straight years of 20+ points per game and 10+ rebounds per game. To put that in perspective, here's a list of all PFs to pull that off: Charles Barkley.

15: Oscar Robertson. The original Mr. Triple Double. He did everything for his teams. He was a one man show for most of his career. He was never surrounded by help while he was in his prime. He was too strong for guards to defend him, to quick for bigs to defend him. He was a NBA champion. MVP. 12x All Star. 11x All NBA. He led the NBA in assists 6 times. He didn't have the team success as his numbers indicate he should have but that's more on management than him.

16. Jerry West. The logo himself. The white boy could play. He made it to the Finals like 9xs. He won an NBA championship. Finals MVP. He's a 14x All Star. 12x All NBA. He could defend with the best of them. He was one of the greatest shooters to ever play and was nicknamed Mr. Clutch (even though he lost so many Finals :lol) He averaged 30, 7, and 6 in his prime.

17. Steph Curry. I know the jokes. I know he is seen as overrated. But he led the Warriors to a title with Draymond Green as his 3rd best player. The dude revolutionized the game except he's the only one who can win that way. His defense sucks, but I don't care about Point Guard defense. The best Point Guard defender of all-time isn't even in the Top 50 of all time great defenders. Steph shoots amazing, he moves off the ball. He never complains about touches and is a willing passer. He has made over 400 3s in a season multiple times. He is a 2x MVP. 3x Champion. He made it to 5 straight Finals. He's a 6x All star and 6x All NBA. He's led the league in steals and is part of the 50-40-90 club. I expect the Warriors to be players in the future. When it's all said and done he will lead the NBA in most 3s ever made.

18. Dirk Oneringsky. He's a 14x All Star. MVP. Finals MVP. 12x All NBA. I was caught between him and Karl Malone. They are totally two different types of players but I feel like Dirk was a slightly better player. He's part of the 50-40-90 club. He's the best shooting 7 footer of all time. He led the Mavs to their best success of all time. Twice they went to the Finals and it took the refs to make him lose the 1st ring. He lost to the 8th seed and became the first team ever to do that in a 7 game series, but Malone also lost in the 1st round something like 9 times so that wasn't enough for me to put Dirk behind him. Dirk is one of 4 NBA players to win a ring as a lead dog without another All Star. Rick Barry, Hakeem, and Timmy are the other 3. He beat the Heat who were beyond the favorites that year. He had the game icer in Miami where he took Bosh to school while sick. He knocked out Kobe, Durant, and Lebron to win that ring. Dirks story is one of greatness

19. Karl Malone. Utah was horrible before Malone. They were known as a sucky franchise going nowhere. Malone was drafted and he put in the work. Sure he is a child rapist. Sure he banged Vanessa Bryant. Sure he gave no help to his son of the 12 year old he impregnated, but he was so good at basketball that we forget all that. He was a 14x All Star. 14x All NBA. He is a 2x MVP. He led the Jazz tot he Finals twice. He is second all time in scoring. He was 31 and 11 in his prime. He has 17 straight years of scoring 20+ points per game. He lost to Jordan twice and choked in 97-98 but the Mailman did deliver the Jazz tot heir best success in franchise history.

20. Kevin Durant. I know. How is Durant below Curry? How is he behind these other all time greats? He is a 2x Champion. He has 2 Finals MVP. He led the league in scoring 4 times. He is a 10x All Star and 9x All NBA. But Durant lost a lot of points with me by running away from his responsibilities. I get it. He wanted a ring. He didn't want to be made fun of anymore for being ringless. But he led the Thunder to the Finals. He was up 3-1 against the Warriors before he blew it. Kevin Durant was on his way to being an all time great, he didn't need to join the Warriors. Durant IS great. I count his titles. But I'm not a titles or bust person. I'm not a Finals MVP or bust person either. Weird to say it but there's some grace in being a Malone or a Ewing. They gave it their all night in and night out and they didn't doubt themselves. Barkley went on live television and said "God wanted him to win a championship." Durant never had that kind of swagger or that kind of leadership. You never felt like you were bulletproof because you had Durant. The Warriors needed Durant during last year. No doubt. But you do wonder how they would've fared if they kept their "Big 3" and got better role players around them. I think they would've done the same. The best thing you can say about Durant is that he is a cheat code that broke the NBA. At the same time I feel like it's the worst thing you can say about him.

[i'm_still_beta]

We all know who the consensus top 10 are (no order): Kobe, Mike, Magic, Larry, Wilt, Shaq, Jim, Jabbar, Lebron, and Bill. Maybe some trolls have Kobe out of the top 10 and switch him with someone else (that's fine just tell us who you are replacing Kobe with). But who are the next 10 players? Everyone has their own list and their own criteria.

11. Moses Malone. 3X MVP. 13 time All-Star. Led Multiple teams to the Finals and won one in 83 along with a Finals MVP where he abuse Kareem. 31 points and 15 rebounds per game in his prime. He was arguably the greatest offensive rebounder of all time and he made your team a contender

12. Hakeem: MVP, All time Blocks leader. 2 time DPOY. Led league in rebounds. 2 time champion and Finals MVP. 12X Allstar and 12x All-NBA. He was arguably the most skilled big man of all time. It took the Rockets nearly 20 years to even sniff any post season success once he left.

13. Dr. J: He joined the NBA late but he was by far the best player of the 70s after Kareem. He had a flawless game, he scored easy, had every move in the book, he could create and defend. Dr. J was a mismatch against anyone he faced. He is a 3x ABA MVP and a NBA MVP. He won 2 ABA titles and 1 NBA title. He was an 5x ABA All Star and 11x NBA All Star. Had he played in the NBA from the get go he would've had far more NBA success. The dude was a straight baller and maybe the most underrated of all time

14. Charles Barkley. I know he doesn't have a ring, but Charles was a beast. He's an 11x All Star. MVP, led the Suns to their first finals since the triple OT loss to Boston. 11x All NBA. He led the league in rebounding. Charles was a match up nightmare. He was too fast and athletic for big men and too strong and imposing for guards. He has 11 straight years of 20+ points per game and 10+ rebounds per game. To put that in perspective, here's a list of all PFs to pull that off: Charles Barkley.

15: Oscar Robertson. The original Mr. Triple Double. He did everything for his teams. He was a one man show for most of his career. He was never surrounded by help while he was in his prime. He was too strong for guards to defend him, to quick for bigs to defend him. He was a NBA champion. MVP. 12x All Star. 11x All NBA. He led the NBA in assists 6 times. He didn't have the team success as his numbers indicate he should have but that's more on management than him.

16. Jerry West. The logo himself. The white boy could play. He made it to the Finals like 9xs. He won an NBA championship. Finals MVP. He's a 14x All Star. 12x All NBA. He could defend with the best of them. He was one of the greatest shooters to ever play and was nicknamed Mr. Clutch (even though he lost so many Finals :lol) He averaged 30, 7, and 6 in his prime.

17. Steph Curry. I know the jokes. I know he is seen as overrated. But he led the Warriors to a title with Draymond Green as his 3rd best player. The dude revolutionized the game except he's the only one who can win that way. His defense sucks, but I don't care about Point Guard defense. The best Point Guard defender of all-time isn't even in the Top 50 of all time great defenders. Steph shoots amazing, he moves off the ball. He never complains about touches and is a willing passer. He has made over 400 3s in a season multiple times. He is a 2x MVP. 3x Champion. He made it to 5 straight Finals. He's a 6x All star and 6x All NBA. He's led the league in steals and is part of the 50-40-90 club. I expect the Warriors to be players in the future. When it's all said and done he will lead the NBA in most 3s ever made.

18. Dirk Oneringsky. He's a 14x All Star. MVP. Finals MVP. 12x All NBA. I was caught between him and Karl Malone. They are totally two different types of players but I feel like Dirk was a slightly better player. He's part of the 50-40-90 club. He's the best shooting 7 footer of all time. He led the Mavs to their best success of all time. Twice they went to the Finals and it took the refs to make him lose the 1st ring. He lost to the 8th seed and became the first team ever to do that in a 7 game series, but Malone also lost in the 1st round something like 9 times so that wasn't enough for me to put Dirk behind him. Dirk is one of 4 NBA players to win a ring as a lead dog without another All Star. Rick Barry, Hakeem, and Timmy are the other 3. He beat the Heat who were beyond the favorites that year. He had the game icer in Miami where he took Bosh to school while sick. He knocked out Kobe, Durant, and Lebron to win that ring. Dirks story is one of greatness

19. Karl Malone. Utah was horrible before Malone. They were known as a sucky franchise going nowhere. Malone was drafted and he put in the work. Sure he is a child rapist. Sure he banged Vanessa Bryant. Sure he gave no help to his son of the 12 year old he impregnated, but he was so good at basketball that we forget all that. He was a 14x All Star. 14x All NBA. He is a 2x MVP. He led the Jazz tot he Finals twice. He is second all time in scoring. He was 31 and 11 in his prime. He has 17 straight years of scoring 20+ points per game. He lost to Jordan twice and choked in 97-98 but the Mailman did deliver the Jazz tot heir best success in franchise history.

20. Kevin Durant. I know. How is Durant below Curry? How is he behind these other all time greats? He is a 2x Champion. He has 2 Finals MVP. He led the league in scoring 4 times. He is a 10x All Star and 9x All NBA. But Durant lost a lot of points with me by running away from his responsibilities. I get it. He wanted a ring. He didn't want to be made fun of anymore for being ringless. But he led the Thunder to the Finals. He was up 3-1 against the Warriors before he blew it. Kevin Durant was on his way to being an all time great, he didn't need to join the Warriors. Durant IS great. I count his titles. But I'm not a titles or bust person. I'm not a Finals MVP or bust person either. Weird to say it but there's some grace in being a Malone or a Ewing. They gave it their all night in and night out and they didn't doubt themselves. Barkley went on live television and said "God wanted him to win a championship." Durant never had that kind of swagger or that kind of leadership. You never felt like you were bulletproof because you had Durant. The Warriors needed Durant during last year. No doubt. But you do wonder how they would've fared if they kept their "Big 3" and got better role players around them. I think they would've done the same. The best thing you can say about Durant is that he is a cheat code that broke the NBA. At the same time I feel like it's the worst thing you can say about him.

:lmao Nice try

[Dirks_Finale]

Barkley is underrated imo. Wouldn't put him above Dirk , though...even if i hated Dallas :lol

[Spurtacular]

Lebron might not be top ten in a non WWE league. Certainly not Kobe.

[DAF86]

Based on career accomplishments, mixed with peak individual seasons*

Top 10: Jordan, Lebron, Duncan, Magic, Bird, Wilt, Russell, Kareem, Shaq, Robertson

11- Hakeem
12- Moses Malone
13- Durant
14- Curry
15- Kobe
16- Robinson
17- Garnett
18- Dirk
19- Karl Malone
20- Barkley

Kawhi is one regular season MVP or another ring away from leapfrogging all the way to top 10.

[TD 21]

Based on career accomplishments, mixed with peak individual seasons*

Top 10: Jordan, Lebron, Duncan, Magic, Bird, Wilt, Russell, Kareem, Shaq, Robertson

11- Hakeem
12- Moses Malone
13- Durant
14- Curry
15- Kobe
16- Robinson
17- Garnett
18- Dirk
19- Karl Malone
20- Barkley

Kawhi is one regular season MVP or another ring away from leapfrogging all the way to top 10.

:lmao What kind of logic is this? It's not just you, I see it all over the place. This prisoner of the moment, no context/nuance, strictly results oriented nonsense.

Look how he "won" last season. By intentionally destroying his value and unwittingly setting up an iteration of a team that would have otherwise never existed (most complete in the league), sitting out 95 games over 2 seasons and having the best team in the league succumb to extreme fatigue/injuries.

Then he blackmails the Clippers into trading for a borderline top 10 player, once again ends up on the most complete team in the league and now all of a sudden he's above reproach?

What ever happened to how you win and longevity? Say what you want about Malone, for example, but the sheer body of work is impressive. Scumbag doesn't have that and more than likely never will because of his "load management".

[DAF86]

:lmao What kind of logic is this? It's not just you, I see it all over the place. This prisoner of the moment, no context/nuance, strictly results oriented nonsense.

Look how he "won" last season. By intentionally destroying his value and unwittingly setting up an iteration of a team that would have otherwise never existed (most complete in the league), sitting out 95 games over 2 seasons and having the best team in the league succumb to extreme fatigue/injuries.

Then he blackmails the Clippers into trading for a borderline top 10 player, once again ends up on the most complete team in the league and now all of a sudden he's above reproach?

What ever happened to how you win and longevity? Say what you want about Malone, for example, but the sheer body of work is impressive. Scumbag doesn't have that and more than likely never will because of his "load management".

My logic is that Kawhi is already a better player than most of the guys I ranked above him, exactly because of that shit you say about longevity is that I still have him outside the top 20.

[Neo.]

Based on career accomplishments, mixed with peak individual seasons*

Top 10: Jordan, Lebron, Duncan, Magic, Bird, Wilt, Russell, Kareem, Shaq, Robertson

11- Hakeem
12- Moses Malone
13- Durant
14- Curry
15- Kobe
16- Robinson
17- Garnett
18- Dirk
19- Karl Malone
20- Barkley

Kawhi is one regular season MVP or another ring away from leapfrogging all the way to top 10.

wow finally backed off your retarded manu > dirk take?

or is there still some alternate universe you alone live in where he's still superior

[TD 21]

My logic is that Kawhi is already a better player than most of the guys I ranked above him, exactly because of that shit you say about longevity is that I still have him outside the top 20.

Based on what? He's put together roughly 4 years of superstar caliber play, won nothing legitimately in that span (in fact, his teams often fell short of expectations in the playoffs) and only won with pristine circumstances that were partially of his creation.

If the Warriors were healthy last season, he's not even in the conversation with these players, but now somehow he's on the verge of passing a bunch because he's caught an obscene amount of breaks?

Contrived = tainted.

[DAF86]

wow finally backed off your retarded manu > dirk take?

or is there still some alternate universe you alone live in where he's still superior

Me saying Manu > Dirk never happened son. It was a myth created by butthurt Mavfans after I schooled their asses on several arguments.

[DAF86]

Based on what? He's put together roughly 4 years of superstar caliber play, won nothing legitimately in that span (in fact, his teams often fell short of expectations in the playoffs) and only won with pristine circumstances that were partially of his creation.

If the Warriors were healthy last season, he's not even in the conversation with these players, but now somehow he's on the verge of passing a bunch because he's caught an obscene amount of breaks?

Contrived = tainted.

Based on watching him play. A 50-40-90 player that also happens to be an all-time great defender. He's just a beast son. I will always despise him but I'm not going to let my hate cloud my judgement.

[Neo.]

Me saying Manu > Dirk never happened son. It was a myth created by butthurt Mavfans after I schooled their asses on several arguments.

so you don't think manu > dirk? and never did?

[DAF86]

so you don't think manu > dirk? and never did?

The whole thing started before Dirk won his ring and I argued that Manu's career > Dirks' (including international play). It was never about who the better player was.

FWIW, I still think Manu's career > Dirks'. Although after 2011, Dirk fans can make a case at least.

And in terms of who is better, I do think Dirk is better, but, imho, they are roughly in the same tier: just a level below the true elite franchise players. I know this is where most will disagree with me because they never saw Manu as a franchise player in the NBA for an extended period of time, but I have no doubt in my mind he will have done pretty damn good at that role.

[Joseph Kony]

swap Hakeem and Kobe imo

11. Oscar
12. Kobe
13. Curry
14. Dr. J
15. Moses
16. Garnett
17. D. Robinson
18. Nowitzki
19. Barkley
20. Durant

[TD 21]

Based on watching him play. A 50-40-90 player that also happens to be an all-time great defender. He's just a beast son. I will always despise him but I'm not going to let my hate cloud my judgement.

Except he's never went 50-40-90 and his play making (literally the co-most important thing for players in his role), intangibles and durability are pathetic.

Alert me when he does something for more than 5 minutes and it occurs in non pristine circumstances partially of his own creation.

He's an Affluenza suffering wannabe, who's all of a sudden become bizarrely worshipped by media, Stockholm syndrome Raptors fans and cuckold Spurs fans alike.

[DAF86]

Except he's never went 50-40-90 and his play making (literally the co-most important thing for players in his role), intangibles and durability are pathetic.

Alert me when he does something for more than 5 minutes and it occurs in non pristine circumstances partially of his own creation.

He's an Affluenza suffering wannabe, who's all of a sudden become bizarrely worshipped by media, Stockholm syndrome Raptors fans and cuckold Spurs fans alike.

If Kawhi wins a third finals MVP with a third different franchise, it will be hard to argue against his legacy, tbh.

Also, everybody in their absolute peak, give me Kawhi over Kobe, Curry, Malone, Barkley, Robertson, etc.

[TD 21]

If Kawhi wins a third finals MVP with a third different franchise, it will be hard to argue against his legacy, tbh.

Also, everybody in their absolute peak, give me Kawhi over Kobe, Curry, Malone, Barkley, Robertson, etc.

:lmao You sound like a casual/agenda driven media. What does that matter when the first he had no business winning as a role player (and nod to James) and the other two are/would be contrived and therefore tainted? You make it sound like he's dragging mediocre teams to championships.

In the "player empowerment" era, Finals MVP has become wildly overrated. It's a microcosm, many times the opponent is overmatched and when close, they become arbitrary. You'd think the Ginobili fanboy of all people would know that.

[Robz4000]

Top 10: MJ, Lebron, Kareem, Magic, Duncan, Bird, Wilt, Shaq, Hakeem, Russell

11-20: Kirby, Dirk, Curry, Moses Malone, Oscar Robertson, Admiral, KG, Dominos, Pedo Malone, Barkley

[DAF86]

:lmao You sound like a casual/agenda driven media. What does that matter when the first he had no business winning as a role player (and nod to James) and the other two are/would be contrived and therefore tainted? You make it sound like he's dragging mediocre teams to championships.

In the "player empowerment" era, Finals MVP has become wildly overrated. It's a microcosm, many times the opponent is overmatched and when close, they become arbitrary. You'd think the Ginobili fanboy of all people would know that.

I know how great Ginobili was. And I know how great Kawhi is. Don't hate me for calling it how it is, tbh.

You seem to be ignoring the fact that I would take peak Kawhi over every player ever except the 7 or 8 elite ones.

[Spurtacular]

Basketball Reference used to have rankings voted on by internet users. They get rid of those?

[Neo.]

I know this is where most will disagree with me because they never saw Manu as a franchise player in the NBA for an extended period of time, but I have no doubt in my mind he will have done pretty damn good at that role.

could have would have should have

fact is manu never was a franchise player at any point of his career. i also dont doubt that he could have had success as i feel he was always very underrated and underappreciated. regardless, he never actually did.

on the other hand, dirk had a type of long-term success that few players have ever had (winning 50+ for 11 straight years in a tough western conference, getting to the finals twice, winning a championship, finals MVP, league MVP, 11 all-nba selections including 4 first-teams in a forward heavy era), which is more baffling that you say he is not a true elite franchise player, when he actually legitimately was, unlike manu who never was the franchise player at any point, yet you think he is a tier right below true elite franchise players

to say dirk wasnt a true elite franchise player (when he was), and that manu is in the same tier as him as being just below true elite franchise players (despite never at any point being a franchise player period), is about as ridiculous as it gets. basically, manu > dirk levels of bad.

[i'm_still_beta]

11- Moses Malone
12- Kobe
13- Oscar Robertson
14- Jerry West
15- Dr J
16- Curry
17- Dirk
18- Garnett
19- Barkley
20- Karl Malone

[Millennial_Messiah]

-Erving
-West
-Westbrook
-Durant
-Harden
-Malone
-Malone
-Nash
-Leonard
-Barkley

[KobesAchilles]

Based on career accomplishments, mixed with peak individual seasons*

Top 10: Jordan, Lebron, Duncan, Magic, Bird, Wilt, Russell, Kareem, Shaq, Robertson

11- Hakeem
12- Moses Malone
13- Durant
14- Curry
15- Kobe
16- Robinson
17- Garnett
18- Dirk
19- Karl Malone
20- Barkley

Kawhi is one regular season MVP or another ring away from leapfrogging all the way to top 10.

My two cents. Both Durant and Steph haven’t had better careers or better peaks than Kobe. Can’t even say it’s a talent thing bc Durant played with 3 MVPs in his career. If Durants career ended today (which honestly it might as we know it) he is behind Kobe I’m almost every feasible way. Points, assists, titles, all nba, all star, etc etc

Also Garnett is not the second greatest PF of all time. He just isn’t. One ring isn’t enough to put him ahead of Charles, Dirk, and Malone. Garnett never led the T-Wolves to shit except one year. Charles led teams made the Finals/ CF. Same for Dirk (except he won his ring as lead dog), and Malone making it to the Finals twice with Utah’s shitty ass roster is more impressive than the 08 season to me.

[TD 21]

I know how great Ginobili was. And I know how great Kawhi is. Don't hate me for calling it how it is, tbh.

You seem to be ignoring the fact that I would take peak Kawhi over every player ever except the 7 or 8 elite ones.

These are just platitudes that don't address any point I brought up.

[Dirks_Finale]

Seeing a few KG over Dirk rankings and not sure how or why that is . KG never led his team to a title. 0 Finals MVP. I think he made it out of the first round once in Minnesota? And Dirk pretty much destroyed him head to head. 37-20 in their matchups. Swept KG in the 2002 playoffs.

[i'm_still_beta]

Seeing a few KG over Dirk rankings and not sure how or why that is . KG never led his team to a title. 0 Finals MVP. I think he made it out of the first round once in Minnesota? And Dirk pretty much destroyed him head to head. 37-20 in their matchups. Swept KG in the 2002 playoffs.
Yes, Dirk outplayed KG in 2002. But one could argue that KG was better all-round player, peaked higher (2004 :worthy:) and had his prime wasted in Minnesota. Dirk was better scorer though. You could make cases for both guys.

[Dirks_Finale]

The whole thing started before Dirk won his ring and I argued that Manu's career > Dirks' (including international play). It was never about who the better player was.

FWIW, I still think Manu's career > Dirks'. Although after 2011, Dirk fans can make a case at least.

And in terms of who is better, I do think Dirk is better, but, imho, they are roughly in the same tier: just a level below the true elite franchise players. I know this is where most will disagree with me because they never saw Manu as a franchise player in the NBA for an extended period of time, but I have no doubt in my mind he will have done pretty damn good at that role.

That's because his body wouldn't hold up playing in a larger role. The few times they tried it he fell apart. Dirk, OTOH, was uberman with rubber ankles and knees for 15 years till the wheels fell off. And I LOVED Manu...wanted Cuban to give him a blank check and get him on the Mavs.

[Neo.]

Yes, Dirk outplayed KG in 2002. But one could argue that KG was better all-round player, peaked higher (2004 :worthy:) and had his prime wasted in Minnesota. Dirk was better scorer though. You could make cases for both guys.

kg was unquestionably superior as an all around player

dirk was unquestionably superior as a scorer and big game clutch player

if you did a checklist of who was better at different aspects of basketball, kg easily gets more checks. but dirks checks are so much more valuable, just the same way a pitcher like yu darvish could throw 8-10 pitches better than most in the league, but all of that could not compare to a guy like madison bumgarner whos elite control of the fastball/cutter made him absolutely unstoppable in the playoffs.

the league always has had plenty of very good all around players at any given point

but there are generally only a very few legit elite clutch scorers at any time in the league

theres a reason most teams build around elite scorers, as opposed to elite all-around players - they are rarer and more valuable

[lefty]

kg was unquestionably superior as an all around player

dirk was unquestionably superior as a scorer and big game clutch player

And that’s why I’m not a big fan of rankings, everyone has different criterias

[Spurtacular]

Basketball Reference used to have rankings voted on by internet users. They get rid of those?

It seems they got rid of it. Online voters were constantly putting Bird, Kareem, or Wilt as #1.
And Jordan often falling to the lower top ten.
They surely got money from factions that prey with the Jordan GOAT narrative.

[Millennial_Messiah]

That's because his body wouldn't hold up playing in a larger role. The few times they tried it he fell apart. Dirk, OTOH, was uberman with rubber ankles and knees for 15 years till the wheels fell off. And I LOVED Manu...wanted Cuban to give him a blank check and get him on the Mavs.

Cuban was a dunce for getting rid of Nash and Nelly in favor of mundane Harris and Avery Johnson... totally bogged down their offense and it wouldn't recover until 2011.

[lefty]

It seems they got rid of it. Online voters were constantly putting Bird, Kareem, or Wilt as #1.
And Jordan often falling to the lower top ten.
They surely got money from factions that prey with the Jordan GOAT narrative.

[Dirks_Finale]

I wasn't happy with his cheapness and idiocy after 2011 either. Dirk finally wins one and they reward him with butter knives like Chris Kaman instead of Chandler. He started treating the Mavs like a shark tank project after 2011...basement bargain shopping.


Cuban was a dunce for getting rid of Nash and Nelly in favor of mundane Harris and Avery Johnson... totally bogged down their offense and it wouldn't recover until 2011.

[Dirks_Finale]

Top Fifty

1. Larry Bird
2. Tim Duncan
3. Lou Alcindor
4. Bill Russell
5. Len Bias
6. John Stockton :lol
7. Wilt Chamberlain
8. Scottie Pippen:lol
9. Pete Maravich
10. Moses Malone
11. Oscar Robertson
12. Julius Erving
13. Kevin McHale :lol
14. Manu Ginobili :lol
15. Hakeem Olajuwon
16. Shaquille O'Neal
17. Kawhi Leonard
18. Karl Malone
19. David Robinson
20. Michael Jordan :lol
21. Isiah Thomas
22. James Worthy
23. Chris Webber
24. Paul Pierce
25. John Havlicek
26. Lebron James
27. Reggie Lewis
28. Bill Walton
29. Robert Parish
30. Dirk Nowitzki
31. Pau Gasol
32. Charles Barkley
33. Steve Nash
34. Alex English
35. Dominique Wilkins
36. Grant Hill
37. Peja Stojakovic :lol
38. Kevin Durant
39. Ray Allen
40. Clyde Drexler
41. Ralph Sampson
42. Earvin Johnson :lol
43. Vlade Divac :lol
44. Kobe Bryant :lol
45. Reggie Miller
46. Bill Laimbeer :lol
47. Toni Kukoc :lol
48. Bruce Bowen :lol
49. Roy Tarpley
50. Rajon Rondo :lol

[Spurtacular]

Top Fifty

1. Larry Bird
2. Tim Duncan
3. Lou Alcindor
4. Bill Russell
5. Len Bias
6. John Stockton
7. Wilt Chamberlain
8. Scottie Pippen
9. Pete Maravich
10. Moses Malone
11. Oscar Robertson
12. Julius Erving
13. Kevin McHale
14. Manu Ginobili
15. Hakeem Olajuwon
16. Kawhi Leonard
17. Karl Malone
18. David Robinson
19. Chris Webber
20. James Worthy
21. Shaquille O'Neal
22. Drazen Petrovic
23. Isiah Thomas
24. Kevin Garnett
25. Michael Jordan
26. Paul Pierce
27. John Havlicek
28. Lebron James
29. Reggie Lewis
30. Bill Walton
31. Robert Parish
32. Dirk Nowitzki
33. Pau Gasol
34. Charles Barkley
35. Steve Nash
36. Dominique Wilkins
47. Ralph Sampson
38. Peja Stojakovic
39. Grant Hill
40. Ray Allen
41. Clyde Drexler
42. Earvin Johnson
43. Vlade Divac
44. Kevin Durant
45. Alex English
46. Tracy McGrady
47. Kobe Bryant
48. Toni Kukoc
49. Bruce Bowen
50. Roy Tarpley
50. Rajon Rondo
50. Patrick Ewing
50. Tony Parker
50. Rick Barry
50. Jason Kidd
50. Dennis Johnson
50. Bill Laimbeer
50. Adrian Dantley
50. Bernard King
50. Chris Mullin
50. Shawn Marion
50. Jerry West

[Killakobe81]

A couple things.
Of course its debatable after Jordan and probably Jabbar. They are not flawless or no brainers but when you factor rings, impact, scoring records, MVps etc. They both hit the most marks. Plus both won in college, when that mattered.

Intangibles boost Bird, Magic and Tim.
Longevity Kareem, Karl Tim Kobe LeBron Dirk get a boost.
Peak dominance Hakeem Shaq. Moses Mj Wilt get a boost etc.

Bottom line is after mj and Kareem its soo debatable and the top 20 is pretty damn great. I dont like mailman I think he is a choker but he used to bust the Lakers ass ...so he is bottom of top 20 for me .. but firmly in.

[Killakobe81]

Top Fifty

1. Larry Bird
2. Tim Duncan
3. Lou Alcindor
4. Bill Russell
5. Len Bias
6. John Stockton
7. Wilt Chamberlain
8. Scottie Pippen
9. Pete Maravich
10. Moses Malone
11. Oscar Robertson
12. Julius Erving
13. Kevin McHale
14. Manu Ginobili
15. Hakeem Olajuwon
16. Kawhi Leonard
17. Karl Malone
18. David Robinson
19. Chris Webber
20. James Worthy
21. Shaquille O'Neal
22. Drazen Petrovic
23. Isiah Thomas
24. Kevin Garnett
25. Michael Jordan
26. Paul Pierce
27. John Havlicek
28. Lebron James
29. Reggie Lewis
30. Bill Walton
31. Robert Parish
32. Dirk Nowitzki
33. Pau Gasol
34. Charles Barkley
35. Steve Nash
36. Dominique Wilkins
47. Ralph Sampson
38. Peja Stojakovic
39. Grant Hill
40. Ray Allen
41. Clyde Drexler
42. Earvin Johnson
43. Vlade Divac
44. Kevin Durant
45. Alex English
46. Tracy McGrady
47. Kobe Bryant
48. Toni Kukoc
49. Bruce Bowen
50. Roy Tarpley
50. Rajon Rondo
50. Patrick Ewing
50. Tony Parker
50. Rick Barry
50. Jason Kidd
50. Dennis Johnson
50. Bill Laimbeer
50. Adrian Dantley
50. Bernard King
50. Chris Mullin
50. Shawn Marion
50. Jerry West

Might be the shiitiest list ever. But i respect your right to be wrong, lol

[Spurtacular]

Might be the shiitiest liat ever. But i respect yiur right ti be wrong lol

What's wrong with it?

[TDMVPDPOY]

IMO dirk should be higher on the list, his at least above kg, kobe, drob, drj, kd, curry...

[Killakobe81]

IMO dirk should be higher on the list, his at least above kg, kobe, drob, drj, kd, curry...

I love Dirk ...but no. He aint over Kobe Steph or KD he does have a case over KG mailman and Drob if you dont care about defense.

And to be fair Dirk is over KD/Steph currently ...but im projecting ...but who knows if KD recovers to close to what he was?!

[TDMVPDPOY]

funni how ppl like to bring up KG is all round player and better peak then dirk, nothing more then a stat padder...dirk doesnt do all those stats, he does the scoring to get the win...

hence how can u blame management when kg was to busy taking those max deals that left no budget to fill a team around him??? excuses excuses is all i hear

[Spurtacular]

IMO dirk should be higher on the list, his at least above kg, kobe, drob, drj, kd, curry...

Dirk got probably as high as he should've for a guy who was pretty much a defensive liability and not a great rebounder.
Definitely a rock on offense and a guy who could get his own quality shots in crunch time. He is above Kobe and KD if you hadn't noticed.
Curry didn't make the list because he's a full-on beneficiary of the soft rules. He and Thompson are on the fringe though.
Dr. J gets ranked lower because people conveniently forget his ABA days. If we're just going by the older Dr. J most are more familiar with he'd be lower.

[Spurtacular]

Kobe Steph or KD

All soft as Charmin, tbh.

[Spurtacular]

funni how ppl like to bring up KG is all round player and better peak then dirk, nothing more then a stat padder...dirk doesnt do all those stats, he does the scoring to get the win...

hence how can u blame management when kg was to busy taking those max deals that left no budget to fill a team around him??? excuses excuses is all i hear

I initially was considering leaving KG off the list b/c he really wasn't as strong in the low post as one would like for a guy with that kind of length and shooting touch. But then I recalled how simply amazing he was as the defensive anchor of that 08 C's team and how he added distribution options on offense in addition to having a great mid range game. He was the real 08 MVP, but they had to give Kobe his lifetime achievement award. Had he not injured his knee in 09, I think the C's would've three-peated. And I tried not to punish players for injuries. They happen. I think "longevity" is over-rated. Lebron or Jordan could've blown out his knee in year two. Injuries are fickle. Also, taking it back to KG, it's not his fault he had to play much of his career in Minneberia with not much talent around him. Dude rivaled The Great Tim Duncan in the early to mid 2000's for a reason.

[i'm_still_beta]

I initially was considering leaving KG off the list b/c he really wasn't as strong in the low post as one would like for a guy with that kind of length and shooting touch. But then I recalled how simply amazing he was as the defensive anchor of that 08 C's team and how he added distribution options on offense in addition to having a great mid range game. He was the real 08 MVP, but they had to give Kobe his lifetime achievement award. Had he not injured his knee in 09, I think the C's would've three-peated. And I tried not to punish players for injuries. They happen. I think "longevity" is over-rated. Lebron or Jordan could've blown out his knee in year two. Injuries are fickle. Also, taking it back to KG, it's not his fault he had to play much of his career in Minneberia with not much talent around him. Dude rivaled The Great Tim Duncan in the early to mid 2000's for a reason.

:toast
Kobe was so lucky to three-peat with Shaq, and then that happened. 5 Rangs doe

[i'm_still_beta]

kg was unquestionably superior as an all around player

dirk was unquestionably superior as a scorer and big game clutch player

if you did a checklist of who was better at different aspects of basketball, kg easily gets more checks. but dirks checks are so much more valuable, just the same way a pitcher like yu darvish could throw 8-10 pitches better than most in the league, but all of that could not compare to a guy like madison bumgarner whos elite control of the fastball/cutter made him absolutely unstoppable in the playoffs.

the league always has had plenty of very good all around players at any given point

but there are generally only a very few legit elite clutch scorers at any time in the league

theres a reason most teams build around elite scorers, as opposed to elite all-around players - they are rarer and more valuable

Brilliant post.

But KG is not your typical all-around player, he was sensational all-around player and Dirk was scoring just a couple more points per game. Still, Dirk was considerably better scorer, was defended much tighter, drew doubles. He was warping defenses something Kevin couldn't do as well.

But KG was extremely versatile, he could defend point guards and centers, was beter passer and etc. He had so many checks at so many aspects of basketball. Just look at this:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1VtZht_8t4

That's unbelivable level of play. Sometimes in the clutch, you have to do things other than scoring.

I think Dirk's ring in 2011 made him greater than KG in the eyes of vast majority of people. He played for much better managed franchise too. It's a shame that Sam Cassell was injured in WCF in 2004. Minnesota could win it all that year. Coulda, woulda, shoulda...

Still, I'm okay that Dirk ranked higher. I just think that it's not that one-sided and arguments can be made for both guys.

[Spurtacular]

:toast
Kobe was so lucky to three-peat with Shaq, and then that happened. 5 Rangs doe

If you want to call rigging series over the Blazers in 01 and Kings in 00 and 02 luck, then yea I agree. He was lucky. :lol

But expanding on this, my list reflects the league cheating and more legitimately how I think careers would've went on an even playing field.
MJ and Kobe are not players who were ever meant to win more than 1-3 titles. They're not the dominant forces they're made out to be.

[Spurtacular]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1VtZht_8t4

Kings were never the same after C Webb hurt his knee in 03. Still, I was hoping they'd dig it out in 04. They had the experience and enough talent.
Adelman not running a play to get a three for the best three shooter in the world at the end? That's why the dude doesn't have a ring as a coach.

[i'm_still_beta]

If you want to call rigging series over the Blazers in 01 and Kings in 00 and 02 luck, then yea I agree. He was lucky. :lol

:lol



But expanding on this, my list reflects the league cheating and more legitimately how I think careers would've went on an even playing field.
MJ and Kobe are not players who were ever meant to win more than 1-3 titles. They're not the dominant forces they're made out to be.

Couldn't agree more. And I think that two-way bigs are the most valuable commodity not only in basketball but in all of North American sports in general

[Killakobe81]

All soft as Charmin, tbh.

Your boys Bowen, Manu, Sjax Horry? david, Timmy and Pop didnt think so

[Neo.]

Brilliant post.

But KG is not your typical all-around player, he was sensational all-around player and Dirk was scoring just a couple more points per game. Still, Dirk was considerably better scorer, was defended much tighter, drew doubles. He was warping defenses something Kevin couldn't do as well.

oh i agree, i didnt intend to diminish how good of an all around player he actually was, just that its more common to find that type of player, than clutch scorers. in KG and Dirk's cases, KG was an elite all around player while Dirk was an elite clutch scorer.


But KG was extremely versatile, he could defend point guards and centers, was beter passer and etc. He had so many checks at so many aspects of basketball. Just look at this:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1VtZht_8t4

That's unbelivable level of play. Sometimes in the clutch, you have to do things other than scoring.

i absolutely agree with this as well, which is what makes a guy like Lebron so incredibly great.


I think Dirk's ring in 2011 made him greater than KG in the eyes of vast majority of people. He played for much better managed franchise too. It's a shame that Sam Cassell was injured in WCF in 2004. Minnesota could win it all that year. Coulda, woulda, shoulda...

Still, I'm okay that Dirk ranked higher. I just think that it's not that one-sided and arguments can be made for both guys.

again i agree. i feel dirk was a greater, more valuable player overall, but its not like hes just far and away above kg, its a pretty close call between the two, and each could be more useful than the other in a team building situation depending on how the team is built

[Spurtacular]

Your boys Bowen, Manu, Sjax Horry? david, Timmy and Pop didnt think so

They know more than anyone about "the star treatment" that occurs in the NBA.

[DAF86]

could have would have should have

fact is manu never was a franchise player at any point of his career. i also dont doubt that he could have had success as i feel he was always very underrated and underappreciated. regardless, he never actually did.

on the other hand, dirk had a type of long-term success that few players have ever had (winning 50+ for 11 straight years in a tough western conference, getting to the finals twice, winning a championship, finals MVP, league MVP, 11 all-nba selections including 4 first-teams in a forward heavy era), which is more baffling that you say he is not a true elite franchise player, when he actually legitimately was, unlike manu who never was the franchise player at any point, yet you think he is a tier right below true elite franchise players

to say dirk wasnt a true elite franchise player (when he was), and that manu is in the same tier as him as being just below true elite franchise players (despite never at any point being a franchise player period), is about as ridiculous as it gets. basically, manu > dirk levels of bad.

When I talk about true elite franchise players, I'm talking about guys like Duncan and Lebron. Dirk isn't on that level, imho.

[Neo.]

When I talk about true elite franchise players, I'm talking about guys like Duncan and Lebron. Dirk isn't on that level, imho.

then manu should be two or three tiers below those guys, not one.

[ambchang]

:lol




Couldn't agree more. And I think that two-way bigs are the most valuable commodity not only in basketball but in all of North American sports in general

You mean like Magic and Tim?

[DAF86]

These are just platitudes that don't address any point I brought up.

It adresses it in the sense that if I were only by peaks I would have Kawhi at 7 or 8, but since I consider the longevity aspect you mention, he's not even on my top 20.

[daslicer]

then manu should be two or three tiers below those guys, not one.

:lol

[i'm_still_beta]

You mean like Magic and Tim?

Not like Magic but like 01-02, 02-03 Tim, 92-93, 93-94 Hakeem, 03-04 Garnett, 76-77 Kareem.

There are 3 phases of the game:
1. Offense
2. Neutral (rebounding)
3. Defense

Guys like Tim, KG, Hakeem and Kareem can dominate all 3 phases, and guys like Kobe and Jordan only 1 and it's offense. While I agree that guards have higher offensive ceiling because of their ability to drive to the hoop and play of the ball, 2-way bigs can still dominate offense and drawing double and triple teams, generating easy offense for teammates. Guards are to small to dominate boards (lol at those who think that 11 boards from Westbrook are as valuable as 11 boards from Duncan who don't steal them from teammmates and boxes out other centers and power forwards allowing teammates to take easy uncontested rebounds) and protect the rim.

[Spurtacular]

Not like Magic but like 01-02, 02-03 Tim, 92-93, 93-94 Hakeem, 03-04 Garnett, 76-77 Kareem.

There are 3 phases of the game:
1. Offense
2. Neutral (rebounding)
3. Defense

Guys like Tim, KG, Hakeem and Kareem can dominate all 3 phases, and guys like Kobe and Jordan only 1 and it's offense. While I agree that guards have higher offensive ceiling because of their ability to drive to the hoop and play of the ball, 2-way bigs can still dominate offense and drawing double and triple teams, generating easy offense for teammates. Guards are to small to dominate boards (lol at those who think that 11 boards from Westbrook are as valuable as 11 boards from Duncan who don't steal them from teammmates and boxes out other centers and power forwards allowing teammates to take easy uncontested rebounds) and protect the rim.

Yup. Bigs like Cartwright, Wennington, Longley are unsung heroes in the Bulls success. Longley was an All-American IIRC ffs. And Cartwright made the all-star team as a rookie.

[DAF86]

Seeing a few KG over Dirk rankings and not sure how or why that is . KG never led his team to a title. 0 Finals MVP. I think he made it out of the first round once in Minnesota? And Dirk pretty much destroyed him head to head. 37-20 in their matchups. Swept KG in the 2002 playoffs.

KG didn't lead his team to a championship? He was, by far, the Celtics best player in '08. That's why he finished 3rd in regular season MVP voting that year. Little known fact, he also lead them in scoring in the playoffs. People remember that Pierce won finals MVP that year and mistakenly believe that Garnett wasn't head and shoulders the main reason for them ringing that year.

I think when comparing KG vs Dirk a lot of folks are underrating KG's overall game and impact on the floor. During his prime, KG would put up the same scoring numbers than Dirk, but he would also add assists, rebounds and all-time great defense. I would say that KG > Dirk is a pretty clear scenario, tbh.

[Neo.]

KG didn't lead his team to a championship? He was, by far, the Celtics best player in '08. That's why he finished 3rd in regular season MVP voting that year. Little known fact, he also lead them in scoring in the playoffs. People remember that Pierce won finals MVP that year and mistakenly believe that Garnett wasn't head and shoulders the main reason for them ringing that year.

he was their best player, but certainly not "by far". otherwise he would have been their go-to guy in the clutch too, whereas he was generally the 3rd option behind pierce and ray.


I think when comparing KG vs Dirk a lot of folks are underrating KG's overall game and impact on the floor. During his prime, KG would put up the same scoring numbers than Dirk, but he would also add assists, rebounds and all-time great defense. I would say that KG > Dirk is a pretty clear scenario, tbh.

kg didn't put up the same scoring numbers as dirk by any means, he only twice averaged more than 23 ppg (his highest being 24.2), while dirk did so 9 times. and lets not even begin to compare their actual scoring skillsets, it's literally not comparable. dirk >>> kg by far in that department.

[Dirks_Finale]

he was their best player, but certainly not "by far". otherwise he would have been their go-to guy in the clutch too, whereas he was generally the 3rd option behind pierce and ray.



kg didn't put up the same scoring numbers as dirk by any means, he only twice averaged more than 23 ppg (his highest being 24.2), while dirk did so 9 times. and lets not even begin to compare their actual scoring skillsets, it's literally not comparable. dirk >>> kg by far in that department.

This post pretty much said it all. And agree with Neo's previous post on the subject. KG gets more check marks in the different aspects of the game. But Dirk's scoring ability, clutchness and ability to draw constant double teams makes him a tad more valuable. I have him maybe 18th overall and KG is not far behind.

[Neo.]

i mean in the end i guess it all comes down to opinion, and no way is daf going to change his considering he truly believes that manu =/> dirk, and is only 1 tier below guys like mj, kareem, bron, and timmy :lmao

[KobesAchilles]

Dirk is better than KG. I always felt like KGs defense was overrated. Minn was never a great defensive team and his “great” individual defense led to no team success. And for all the shit that Dirk takes for his defense, KG doesn’t get for his running away from clutch moments. When Dallas needed a bucket they went to Dirk and he either delivered or atleast took the damn shot and didn’t run away from the moment. When Minn needed a bucket KG never stepped up, he passed up the ball a lot, and just seemed scared. And when Bos needed a bucket they went nowhere near KG.

[Neo.]

Dirk is better than KG. I always felt like KGs defense was overrated. Minn was never a great defensive team and his “great” individual defense led to no team success. And for all the shit that Dirk takes for his defense, KG doesn’t get for his running away from clutch moments. When Dallas needed a bucket they went to Dirk and he either delivered or atleast took the damn shot and didn’t run away from the moment. When Minn needed a bucket KG never stepped up, he passed up the ball a lot, and just seemed scared. And when Bos needed a bucket they went nowhere near KG.

this

even in boston i cant name how many times i watched as he was hitting wide open midrange shots all game long, then in crunch time suddenly started bricking them

[DAF86]

he was their best player, but certainly not "by far". otherwise he would have been their go-to guy in the clutch too, whereas he was generally the 3rd option behind pierce and ray.

Garnett's lead over the second best Celtic in '08: +.058 WS / + 1.4 OBPM / + 2.1 DBPM / +3.6 BPM

For comparisson's sake, here are other "clear alphas" numbers in years they won:

Kobe in '09: -.019 (yeah, that's negative. Gasol had a better WS/48 than Kobe) / + 1.6 OBPM / - 0.2 DBPM / +1.4 BPM

Duncan in '05: +.005 WS / - 0.7 OBPM / 0.0 DBPM / 0.7 BPM

Lebron in '12: +.071 WS / + 2.2 OBPM / 0.8 DBPM / 3.0 BPM

And last, but not least, Dirk in '11: -.005 (would you look at this? Dirk's historic run has actually another player with the better WS/48 :wow) / + 2.8 OBPM / -1.8 DBPM / + 2.3 BPM

So, as you can see. If Garnett wasn't clearly and "by far" the best Celtic player in '08, then neither of these other guys were. Would you agree with the statement that Dirk wasn't the Mavs' best player in '11 "by far"?


]kg didn't put up the same scoring numbers as dirk by any means, he only twice averaged more than 23 ppg (his highest being 24.2), while dirk did so 9 times. and lets not even begin to compare their actual scoring skillsets, it's literally not comparable. dirk >>> kg by far in that department.

Why do you draw the line at 23 ppg? That's arbitrary as fuck, tbh. :lol

Dirk's career ppg is 20.7 - Garnetts is 17.8 and the difference is actually shorter in prime years (which was literally what I said) because KG past prime years were a lot worse than Dirk's past prime years in terms of scoring.

Since we are talking who the better player was, let's just look at the stats that help us indicate that:

Garnett: PER: 22.7 - WS/48 .182 - BPM: 5.6 - VORP: 96.9
Dirk PER: 22.4 - WS/48 . 193 - BPM: 4.5 - VORP: 84.8

For all intents and purposes, KG was the better player, tbh.

[Neo.]

Garnett's lead over the second best Celtic in '08: +.058 WS / + 1.4 OBPM / + 2.1 DBPM / +3.6 BPM

For comparisson's sake, here are other "clear alphas" numbers in years they won:

Kobe in '09: -.019 (yeah, that's negative. Gasol had a better WS/48 than Kobe) / + 1.6 OBPM / - 0.2 DBPM / +1.4 BPM

Duncan in '05: +.005 WS / - 0.7 OBPM / 0.0 DBPM / 0.7 BPM

Lebron in '12: +.071 WS / + 2.2 OBPM / 0.8 DBPM / 3.0 BPM

And last, but not least, Dirk in '11: -.005 (would you look at this? Dirk's historic run has actually another player with the better WS/48 :wow) / + 2.8 OBPM / -1.8 DBPM / + 2.3 BPM

So, as you can see. If Garnett wasn't clearly and "by far" the best Celtic player in '08, then neither of these other guys were. Would you agree with the statement that Dirk wasn't the Mavs' best player in '11 "by far"?



Why do you draw the line at 23 ppg? That's arbitrary as fuck, tbh. :lol

Dirk's career ppg is 20.7 - Garnetts is 17.8 and the difference is actually shorter in prime years (which was literally what I said) because KG past prime years were a lot worse than Dirk's past prime years in terms of scoring.

Since we are talking who the better player was, let's just look at the stats that help us indicate that:

Garnett: PER: 22.7 - WS/48 .182 - BPM: 5.6 - VORP: 96.9
Dirk PER: 22.4 - WS/48 . 193 - BPM: 4.5 - VORP: 84.8

For all intents and purposes, KG was the better player, tbh.

:lmao at all this picking and choosing of stats, particularly ones that are notorious for favoring big men in the post over mid-range and perimeter play

lets throw it all out the window with this one simple stat

15-16 spurs (67 wins)

your hero kawhi had a ws/48 of .277
boban had a ws/48 of .325

boban was by far the best basketball player in the NBA apparently

as for dirk in 2011, the regular season wasnt the historic part of that run, it was the playoffs, which he still led the team in ws/48, BPM and VORP

however whats interesting is mahinmi was right behind him in ws/48 by .001, while having a bpm of -8.4. yes, i believe that advanced stats in some cases can help tell a story of value that normal stats dont show, but they can also be equally flawed and inconsistent as well. and they still dont tell the story of a players actual skillset, which when it comes to scoring, dirk >>> kg and only a moron like yourself would try to argue

as for the 23ppg, that was KGs second best scoring season. so basically dirk had 9 seasons of scoring averages that were equal or greater than KGs 2nd best. so no, kg in his prime absolutely did not "put up the same scoring numbers" as dirk as you claimed

[KobesAchilles]

Garnett's lead over the second best Celtic in '08: +.058 WS / + 1.4 OBPM / + 2.1 DBPM / +3.6 BPM

For comparisson's sake, here are other "clear alphas" numbers in years they won:

Kobe in '09: -.019 (yeah, that's negative. Gasol had a better WS/48 than Kobe) / + 1.6 OBPM / - 0.2 DBPM / +1.4 BPM

Duncan in '05: +.005 WS / - 0.7 OBPM / 0.0 DBPM / 0.7 BPM

Lebron in '12: +.071 WS / + 2.2 OBPM / 0.8 DBPM / 3.0 BPM

And last, but not least, Dirk in '11: -.005 (would you look at this? Dirk's historic run has actually another player with the better WS/48 :wow) / + 2.8 OBPM / -1.8 DBPM / + 2.3 BPM

So, as you can see. If Garnett wasn't clearly and "by far" the best Celtic player in '08, then neither of these other guys were. Would you agree with the statement that Dirk wasn't the Mavs' best player in '11 "by far"?



Why do you draw the line at 23 ppg? That's arbitrary as fuck, tbh. :lol

Dirk's career ppg is 20.7 - Garnetts is 17.8 and the difference is actually shorter in prime years (which was literally what I said) because KG past prime years were a lot worse than Dirk's past prime years in terms of scoring.

Since we are talking who the better player was, let's just look at the stats that help us indicate that:

Garnett: PER: 22.7 - WS/48 .182 - BPM: 5.6 - VORP: 96.9
Dirk PER: 22.4 - WS/48 . 193 - BPM: 4.5 - VORP: 84.8

For all intents and purposes, KG was the better player, tbh.
And who did Bos go to in the clutch? Bc it certainly wasn’t Garnett. They went to Pierce or Allen. Garnett was an afterthought in the crunch which basically sums up his career

[Spurtacular]

I always felt like KGs defense was overrated. Minn was never a great defensive team and his “great” individual defense led to no team success.

His defensive skills weren't utilized in Minn. like in Boston. The 08 Celts had maybe the best defense in this century with KG anchoring it.

[KobesAchilles]

His defensive skills weren't utilized in Minn. like in Boston. The 08 Celts had maybe the best defense in this century with KG anchoring it.
Spurs had several defensive teams better than the Celtics. Both 04 and 05 and arguably 06 as well. Plus the 04 Pistons were a much better defensive team. Celtics would be 3rd at best of the century but more realistically closer to the 5th best

[Dirks_Finale]

His defensive skills weren't utilized in Minn. like in Boston. The 08 Celts had maybe the best defense in this century with KG anchoring it.

I like that 2008 Celtic team. But if they were so great why were they getting pushed to the brink by the hawks :lol

[Spurtacular]

I like that 2008 Celtic team. But if they were so great why were they getting pushed to the brink by the hawks :lol

Hawks did better than Liftetime Achievement Award Kobe's Lakers did against the 08 Celtics. :lol

[Spurtacular]

Spurs had several defensive teams better than the Celtics. Both 04 and 05 and arguably 06 as well. Plus the 04 Pistons were a much better defensive team. Celtics would be 3rd at best of the century but more realistically closer to the 5th best

03/04 Spurs D-Rating: 94.79
03/04 Pistons D-Rating: 96.48
04/05 Spurs D-Rating: 99.59
07/08 Celtics D-Rating: 99.75
05/06 Spurs D-Rating: 100.32

You have a case. Of course, such ratings are a barometer, but not fully conclusive.
There are other Spurs teams in the convo. There are other Celtics teams in the discussion
The common denominators are Tim Duncan and Kevin Garnett though.
The 15-16 Spurs are in the discussion; and with that team TD's defense had evolved to look more like KG's expansive defense.

[Spurtacular]

Top Fifty

1. Larry Bird
2. Tim Duncan
3. Lou Alcindor
4. Bill Russell
5. Len Bias
6. John Stockton
7. Wilt Chamberlain
8. Scottie Pippen
9. Pete Maravich
10. Moses Malone
11. Oscar Robertson
12. Julius Erving
13. Kevin McHale
14. Manu Ginobili
15. Hakeem Olajuwon
16. Kawhi Leonard
17. Karl Malone
18. David Robinson
19. Chris Webber
20. James Worthy
21. Shaquille O'Neal
22. Drazen Petrovic
23. Isiah Thomas
24. Kevin Garnett
25. Michael Jordan
26. Paul Pierce
27. John Havlicek
28. Lebron James
29. Reggie Lewis
30. Bill Walton
31. Robert Parish
32. Dirk Nowitzki
33. Pau Gasol
34. Charles Barkley
35. Steve Nash
36. Dominique Wilkins
47. Ralph Sampson
38. Peja Stojakovic
39. Grant Hill
40. Ray Allen
41. Clyde Drexler
42. Earvin Johnson
43. Vlade Divac
44. Kevin Durant
45. Alex English
46. Tracy McGrady
47. Kobe Bryant
48. Toni Kukoc
49. Bruce Bowen
50. Roy Tarpley
50. Rajon Rondo
50. Patrick Ewing
50. Tony Parker
50. Rick Barry
50. Jason Kidd
50. Dennis Johnson
50. Bill Laimbeer
50. Adrian Dantley
50. Bernard King
50. Chris Mullin
50. Shawn Marion
50. Jerry West
lefty

[DAF86]

:lmao at all this picking and choosing of stats, particularly ones that are notorious for favoring big men in the post over mid-range and perimeter play

lets throw it all out the window with this one simple stat

15-16 spurs (67 wins)

your hero kawhi had a ws/48 of .277
boban had a ws/48 of .325

boban was by far the best basketball player in the NBA apparently

lol son. You can't use players that don't qualify on terms of minutes played. In 2011 Steve Novak had better OBPM and BPM than Dirk. The thing is, he played a Grand total of 18 minutes in 7 games. :lol

WS, BPM and VORP aren't "nitpicking" stats, son. They are actually the best indicators of a player's impact. Way more valuable than counting stats like PPG, APG, etc.


as for dirk in 2011, the regular season wasnt the historic part of that run, it was the playoffs, which he still led the team in ws/48, BPM and VORP

however whats interesting is mahinmi was right behind him in ws/48 by .001, while having a bpm of -8.4. yes, i believe that advanced stats in some cases can help tell a story of value that normal stats dont show, but they can also be equally flawed and inconsistent as well. and they still dont tell the story of a players actual skillset, which when it comes to scoring, dirk >>> kg and only a moron like yourself would try to argue

Again, I don't know why you bring up irrelevant players without enough playing time to qualify, like Mahinmi.


as for the 23ppg, that was KGs second best scoring season. so basically dirk had 9 seasons of scoring averages that were equal or greater than KGs 2nd best. so no, kg in his prime absolutely did not "put up the same scoring numbers" as dirk as you claimed

Dirk's best 5 offensive seasons: 25.7 ppg and 2.7 apg.

KG's best 5 offensive seasons: 23 ppg and 5.4 apg.

Dirk is the better scorer while KG is the better passer and playmaker. Overall, I would say it's pretty even with a slight edge for Dirk on the offensive side. But then you consider all the other aspects of the game, and to me it's clear that KG is better overall. Not by far, but he is indeed better.

[DAF86]

And who did Bos go to in the clutch? Bc it certainly wasn’t Garnett. They went to Pierce or Allen. Garnett was an afterthought in the crunch which basically sums up his career

Who did the Spurs went in the clutch? First Manu and then Tony. Does that make Duncan any less of an all-time great? No, no it doesn't. Thanks for playing, next time come with a better argument. Bye.

[KobesAchilles]

Who did the Spurs went in the clutch? First Manu and then Tony. Does that make Duncan any less of an all-time great? No, no it doesn't. Thanks for playing, next time come with a better argument. Bye.
You're not even a Spurs fan are you? When did you start watching them? 2013? Bc that's when they went really started to go Tony Parker in the clutch :lol The Spurs did go to Ginobili in the clutch no doubt but Timmy was there just as much in big moments.

I mean besides Duncan having several game winners. The Spurs went to Duncan a lot. They gave him the ball every possession down the stretch for the 99 finals. Something I doubt you saw and he delivered. Duncan was the go to crunch time scorer in 99, 00, 01, 02, 03, and 04. He shared duties with Gino in 05 and 06. But 07 and 08 was more Tim. Off the top of my head Duncan has 2014 shot that sent the Spurs to the Finals. He hit the shot to give the Spurs the lead before the Fisher shot in 04. He hit the game tying 3 against Phoenix in 2008. He missed the game tying shot in game 7 2013 against the Heat but they went to him. He hit the game leading free throws to put the Spurs up 1 in game 7 in 2015. You could pretty much go back every post season (except 2011 and 2016) and you will see that the Spurs went to Duncan in the clutch, crunch time, to close out series, etc.

I will now list all of Garnett's big playoff go to moments with the Wolves in the clutch: cricket cricket
And with the Celtics he did have a game winner in the first round against the 39 win Hawks team. So there is that. You got me.

[DAF86]

You're not even a Spurs fan are you? When did you start watching them? 2013? Bc that's when they went really started to go Tony Parker in the clutch :lol The Spurs did go to Ginobili in the clutch no doubt but Timmy was there just as much in big moments.

I mean besides Duncan having several game winners. The Spurs went to Duncan a lot. They gave him the ball every possession down the stretch for the 99 finals. Something I doubt you saw and he delivered. Duncan was the go to crunch time scorer in 99, 00, 01, 02, 03, and 04. He shared duties with Gino in 05 and 06. But 07 and 08 was more Tim. Off the top of my head Duncan has 2014 shot that sent the Spurs to the Finals. He hit the shot to give the Spurs the lead before the Fisher shot in 04. He hit the game tying 3 against Phoenix in 2008. He missed the game tying shot in game 7 2013 against the Heat but they went to him. He hit the game leading free throws to put the Spurs up 1 in game 7 in 2015. You could pretty much go back every post season (except 2011 and 2016) and you will see that the Spurs went to Duncan in the clutch, crunch time, to close out series, etc.

I will now list all of Garnett's big playoff go to moments with the Wolves in the clutch: cricket cricket
And with the Celtics he did have a game winner in the first round against the 39 win Hawks team. So there is that. You got me.

So, you are telling me Duncan was the go to guy in the clutch when the Spurs didn't have HoF guards? What a crazy concept. Guess what? The Wolves went to Garnett plenty in the clutch too.

Not being the go to guy in the clutch doesn't mean you are not clearly and by far the team's best player. Duncan wasn't the Spurs go to player in the clutch for the Spurs past 2004. Shaq was never a go to guy player in the clutch for any of his teams either. Yet those guys were still pretty clearly their teams' best player. The same happens with KG and the 2008 Celtics. When you are a bigman and have HoF guards on your team, you are bound to be a secondary option in the clutch, tbh.

Just for the hell of it, here are some of KG's clutch shots:

b_4pSLoPO64
0EXtOryofJQ
ba3FkfBAWJA

[KobesAchilles]

So, you are telling me Duncan was the go to guy in the clutch when the Spurs didn't have HoF guards? What a crazy concept. Guess what? The Wolves went to Garnett plenty in the clutch too.

Not being the go to guy in the clutch doesn't mean you are not clearly and by far the team's best player. Duncan wasn't the Spurs go to player in the clutch for the Spurs past 2004. Shaq was never a go to guy player in the clutch for any of his teams either. Yet those guys were still pretty clearly their teams' best player. The same happens with KG and the 2008 Celtics. When you are a bigman and have HoF guards on your team, you are bound to be a secondary option in the clutch, tbh.

Just for the hell of it, here are some of KG's clutch shots:

b_4pSLoPO64
0EXtOryofJQ
ba3FkfBAWJA
Literally named like 5 shots after 2004 but I guess that doesn’t count for some reason. 2014 to send team to finals. 2013 they went to him to tie the game in game 7. He missed but they still went to him. 2008 he hit the 3 against Phoenix. Also hit a clutch shot against the Hornets that year. Spurs also went to Duncan in 2015 game 7 vs Clips where he got fouled and sunk both free throws to put them up by 1 with like 10
seconds left in the series.

And you just repeated my Atlanta shot. That doesn’t count. That’s not adding to the conversation. I gave you that shot. I literally told you about it and yet you still posted it as if to show me something new. Sad. Just sad. You know why you had to repeat that Atlanta shot? Bc Garnett doesn’t have any real moments in the playoffs. Hard to find clutch moments of Garnett isn’t it.

[KobesAchilles]

Also I’m so sick of the excuses for Garnett being a shitty franchise player. Bc that’s what he was. A shitty franchise player. He’s a great #2 player but he’s not a franchise player. He literally has an entire career proving this. The Wolves were in the playoffs 8 times with Garnett leading the franchise. Here are the results
Lost 1st round
Lost 1st round
Lost 1st round
Lost 1st round
Lost 1st round
Lost 1st round
Lost 1st round
WCF 2004
2005 missed playoffs
2006 missed playoffs
2007 missed playoffs.
2004 was the anomaly not the rule. And every excuse has been made for Garnett except the actual truth.

Excuse #1: He had really shitty teammates. David Robinson (a known playoff shrinker) made it to the WCF with Avery Johnson and Vinny Del Negro as the starting back court. Dirk took a team who’s second beat player was Josh Howard to the finals. He also won a championship with Tyson fucking Chandler as the second best player. Tim Duncan won a championship where he led the team in points, assists, rebounds, and blocks in the postseason. He averaged 1 point less than the next two top scorers COMBINED. I’m not saying that Garnett needed to win a chip in Minny but you can’t tell me that in 11 years you can lose in the first round 7 times, miss the playoffs 3 times, and make ONE WCF appearance and tell me he is a greater franchise player than Dirk. Or the second best PF of all time.

2. He had shitty coaching. Shaq had Del Harris and whoever the fuck was the Orlando coach and made it out of the 1st round. Robinson has John Lucas. Fucking Lucas as a coach and made it out of the 1st round. Dirk had Avery Johnson who can’t coach worth shit and made it to the finals. Coaching matters to win a championship for sure but not to make it out of the first round ffs

3. Minnesota has horrible luck. They got caught tampering. Starbury left them bc he wanted more money than Garnett. Marbury is and always will be a loser and never led a team to shit or really helped a team. They were better off losing him. And Joe Smith sucked. It was beyond stupid of the Wolves to tamper for him. But they didn’t really lose any picks of value for him. Yes 4 first rounders hurts but they didn’t lose any lottery picks. I think the best pick they lost was like the 18th pick. Not bad enough to cripple a franchise like it’s made out to be.

Facts are that Dirk was a better player than Garnett. Dirk had all the same issues as Garnett, (shitty franchise, bad teammates, bad coach) but he overcame them. Garnett is not a top 20 player all time. Garnett didn’t do shit as a wolf and no amount of excuses can cover up the fact that he was a shitty franchise player.

[Dirks_Finale]

Garnett played for like 20 years. He's bound to have a few clutch shots over 2 decades :lol

The fact of the matter is, he was steadily deferring to Wally Szczerbiak in Minnesota when he should have been closing out games the way superstars close out games. He is why they were a playoff team in Minnestoa, he is also why they were routinely, first round fodder.


So, you are telling me Duncan was the go to guy in the clutch when the Spurs didn't have HoF guards? What a crazy concept. Guess what? The Wolves went to Garnett plenty in the clutch too.

Not being the go to guy in the clutch doesn't mean you are not clearly and by far the team's best player. Duncan wasn't the Spurs go to player in the clutch for the Spurs past 2004. Shaq was never a go to guy player in the clutch for any of his teams either. Yet those guys were still pretty clearly their teams' best player. The same happens with KG and the 2008 Celtics. When you are a bigman and have HoF guards on your team, you are bound to be a secondary option in the clutch, tbh.

Just for the hell of it, here are some of KG's clutch shots:

b_4pSLoPO64
0EXtOryofJQ
ba3FkfBAWJA

[TDMVPDPOY]

lol kg and clutch dont go together..20years in the league and he only has 2-3 good series, and ppl act like his played like that his whole career

when its h2h matchups in the rs or playoffs against a superstar at his position, he disappears

[lefty]

Also I’m so sick of the excuses for Garnett being a shitty franchise player. Bc that’s what he was. A shitty franchise player. He’s a great #2 player but he’s not a franchise player. He literally has an entire career proving this. The Wolves were in the playoffs 8 times with Garnett leading the franchise. Here are the results
Lost 1st round
Lost 1st round
Lost 1st round
Lost 1st round
Lost 1st round
Lost 1st round
Lost 1st round
WCF 2004
2005 missed playoffs
2006 missed playoffs
2007 missed playoffs.
2004 was the anomaly not the rule. And every excuse has been made for Garnett except the actual truth.

Excuse #1: He had really shitty teammates. David Robinson (a known playoff shrinker) made it to the WCF with Avery Johnson and Vinny Del Negro as the starting back court. Dirk took a team who’s second beat player was Josh Howard to the finals. He also won a championship with Tyson fucking Chandler as the second best player. Tim Duncan won a championship where he led the team in points, assists, rebounds, and blocks in the postseason. He averaged 1 point less than the next two top scorers COMBINED. I’m not saying that Garnett needed to win a chip in Minny but you can’t tell me that in 11 years you can lose in the first round 7 times, miss the playoffs 3 times, and make ONE WCF appearance and tell me he is a greater franchise player than Dirk. Or the second best PF of all time.

2. He had shitty coaching. Shaq had Del Harris and whoever the fuck was the Orlando coach and made it out of the 1st round. Robinson has John Lucas. Fucking Lucas as a coach and made it out of the 1st round. Dirk had Avery Johnson who can’t coach worth shit and made it to the finals. Coaching matters to win a championship for sure but not to make it out of the first round ffs

3. Minnesota has horrible luck. They got caught tampering. Starbury left them bc he wanted more money than Garnett. Marbury is and always will be a loser and never led a team to shit or really helped a team. They were better off losing him. And Joe Smith sucked. It was beyond stupid of the Wolves to tamper for him. But they didn’t really lose any picks of value for him. Yes 4 first rounders hurts but they didn’t lose any lottery picks. I think the best pick they lost was like the 18th pick. Not bad enough to cripple a franchise like it’s made out to be.

Facts are that Dirk was a better player than Garnett. Dirk had all the same issues as Garnett, (shitty franchise, bad teammates, bad coach) but he overcame them. Garnett is not a top 20 player all time. Garnett didn’t do shit as a wolf and no amount of excuses can cover up the fact that he was a shitty franchise player.
To be fair, the 95 Spurs met a young Lakers team in the 2nd round; talented team but not really battle tested except for a few veterans

[KobesAchilles]

To be fair, the 95 Spurs met a young Lakers team in the 2nd round; talented team but not really battle tested except for a few veterans
But they still made it out of the first round was my main point

[Neo.]

lol son. You can't use players that don't qualify on terms of minutes played. In 2011 Steve Novak had better OBPM and BPM than Dirk. The thing is, he played a Grand total of 18 minutes in 7 games. :lol

WS, BPM and VORP aren't "nitpicking" stats, son. They are actually the best indicators of a player's impact. Way more valuable than counting stats like PPG, APG, etc.



Again, I don't know why you bring up irrelevant players without enough playing time to qualify, like Mahinmi.



Dirk's best 5 offensive seasons: 25.7 ppg and 2.7 apg.

KG's best 5 offensive seasons: 23 ppg and 5.4 apg.

Dirk is the better scorer while KG is the better passer and playmaker. Overall, I would say it's pretty even with a slight edge for Dirk on the offensive side. But then you consider all the other aspects of the game, and to me it's clear that KG is better overall. Not by far, but he is indeed better.

point is, you are using stats to back up a guy whos career was defined by stats. he has exceptional stats. but they dont account for his clear shortcomings, which was poor performance in the clutch, limited scoring skillset, and questionable leadership outside of a bunch of screaming and crying to show how much he cares. being heavily emotional and hating losing doesn't make you a good leader. overcoming weaknesses as a player and coming through for your team when they need you most are much more important qualities for a leader, neither of which he did much of through his career.

i think kobesachilles may be overstating his shortcomings a bit, as many of his playoff losses were simply a matter of losing to a clearly superior team. but there is plenty of truth to what he said, dude frequently crumbled in the clutch, and if he was more aggressive or had a stronger scoring skillset, perhaps they win one or two of those series, or at the very least being much more competitive in many of the ones they lost. they certainly had no business being swept by the mavs in 02. and most of the truly great players have led their team to an upset or two in their career. dirk definitely did on several occasions, Utah in 01, SA in 06, SA in 09, LA in 11

[lefty]

But they still made it out of the first round was my main point
Against the Nuggets

KG lost to better teams than the Wolves (I coud be wrong, I haven't googled it tbh)

[KobesAchilles]

Against the Nuggets

KG lost to better teams than the Wolves (I coud be wrong, I haven't googled it tbh)
You’re missing the point. Had KG been a true franchise player he would’ve led the Wolves to a better REGULAR season record which gives you an easier match up. But KG the best he did was 2004. Besides that ONE year the best he did was the 5th seed (once) and 7th or 8th seed the other years. One of those years he got swept by Dirk, who averaged over 30 against his ass. My point of bringing up DRob was to compare KG to another player who was seen as a playoff choker except that even Robinson did better in the playoffs than KG. The Spurs made it to the second round numerous times.

[lefty]

Ah ok ok

[Neo.]

You’re missing the point. Had KG been a true franchise player he would’ve led the Wolves to a better REGULAR season record which gives you an easier match up. But KG the best he did was 2004. Besides that ONE year the best he did was the 5th seed (once) and 7th or 8th seed the other years. One of those years he got swept by Dirk, who averaged over 30 against his ass. My point of bringing up DRob was to compare KG to another player who was seen as a playoff choker except that even Robinson did better in the playoffs than KG. The Spurs made it to the second round numerous times.

this

or had he possessed more offensive skill or a more aggressive scoring mindset, he would have been more useful in clutch situations, likely leading to more victories, more competitive series, and probably a couple more 2nd round appearances

for a big man like him, whos offense consisted mainly of high% shots (low post-ups, putbacks, and mid-range pick-and-pop), its a little odd that he struggled so much to shoot 50% on 2pt shots (with his career average being helped from his years in boston where he had so little attention that he literally didnt have to do anything except hit wide open jumpers and putbacks). he didn't really have to take difficult shots much in his career, and the times he did, he was mostly terrible at it, unlike guys like timmy and dirk who had some go-to shots they could hit against tough defenses

[DAF86]

Literally named like 5 shots after 2004 but I guess that doesn’t count for some reason. 2014 to send team to finals. 2013 they went to him to tie the game in game 7. He missed but they still went to him. 2008 he hit the 3 against Phoenix. Also hit a clutch shot against the Hornets that year. Spurs also went to Duncan in 2015 game 7 vs Clips where he got fouled and sunk both free throws to put them up by 1 with like 10
seconds left in the series.

And you just repeated my Atlanta shot. That doesn’t count. That’s not adding to the conversation. I gave you that shot. I literally told you about it and yet you still posted it as if to show me something new. Sad. Just sad. You know why you had to repeat that Atlanta shot? Bc Garnett doesn’t have any real moments in the playoffs. Hard to find clutch moments of Garnett isn’t it.

5 shots in a 12 years span. What's that suppossed to prove? :lol Garnett also had his share of clutch shots taken with the Celtics in a much shorter time span, tbh. Just because we can't remember every single one like we do with Spurs related material, it doesn't mean it didn't existed. In any case, with the 2 shots I showed while he was on the Celtics, he already matches your 5 in 12 years that Duncan took. KG played only 5 postseasons with the Celtics.

[DAF86]

Garnett played for like 20 years. He's bound to have a few clutch shots over 2 decades :lol

The fact of the matter is, he was steadily deferring to Wally Szczerbiak in Minnesota when he should have been closing out games the way superstars close out games. He is why they were a playoff team in Minnestoa, he is also why they were routinely, first round fodder.

I guess Shaq should have been closing out games like Superstars do instead of deferring to guys like Nick Anderson. Dirk > Shaq

See how retarded this "clutch" argument is? It seems as if you guys would hang on everything to try and make your case, tbh. :lol

[DAF86]

Also I’m so sick of the excuses for Garnett being a shitty franchise player. Bc that’s what he was. A shitty franchise player. He’s a great #2 player but he’s not a franchise player. He literally has an entire career proving this. The Wolves were in the playoffs 8 times with Garnett leading the franchise. Here are the results
Lost 1st round
Lost 1st round
Lost 1st round
Lost 1st round
Lost 1st round
Lost 1st round
Lost 1st round
WCF 2004
2005 missed playoffs
2006 missed playoffs
2007 missed playoffs.
2004 was the anomaly not the rule. And every excuse has been made for Garnett except the actual truth.

Excuse #1: He had really shitty teammates. David Robinson (a known playoff shrinker) made it to the WCF with Avery Johnson and Vinny Del Negro as the starting back court. Dirk took a team who’s second beat player was Josh Howard to the finals. He also won a championship with Tyson fucking Chandler as the second best player. Tim Duncan won a championship where he led the team in points, assists, rebounds, and blocks in the postseason. He averaged 1 point less than the next two top scorers COMBINED. I’m not saying that Garnett needed to win a chip in Minny but you can’t tell me that in 11 years you can lose in the first round 7 times, miss the playoffs 3 times, and make ONE WCF appearance and tell me he is a greater franchise player than Dirk. Or the second best PF of all time.

2. He had shitty coaching. Shaq had Del Harris and whoever the fuck was the Orlando coach and made it out of the 1st round. Robinson has John Lucas. Fucking Lucas as a coach and made it out of the 1st round. Dirk had Avery Johnson who can’t coach worth shit and made it to the finals. Coaching matters to win a championship for sure but not to make it out of the first round ffs

3. Minnesota has horrible luck. They got caught tampering. Starbury left them bc he wanted more money than Garnett. Marbury is and always will be a loser and never led a team to shit or really helped a team. They were better off losing him. And Joe Smith sucked. It was beyond stupid of the Wolves to tamper for him. But they didn’t really lose any picks of value for him. Yes 4 first rounders hurts but they didn’t lose any lottery picks. I think the best pick they lost was like the 18th pick. Not bad enough to cripple a franchise like it’s made out to be.

Facts are that Dirk was a better player than Garnett. Dirk had all the same issues as Garnett, (shitty franchise, bad teammates, bad coach) but he overcame them. Garnett is not a top 20 player all time. Garnett didn’t do shit as a wolf and no amount of excuses can cover up the fact that he was a shitty franchise player.

He's such a great #2 player that he won a championship as the best player on his team. :lol

[DAF86]

point is, you are using stats to back up a guy whos career was defined by stats. he has exceptional stats. but they dont account for his clear shortcomings, which was poor performance in the clutch, limited scoring skillset, and questionable leadership outside of a bunch of screaming and crying to show how much he cares. being heavily emotional and hating losing doesn't make you a good leader. overcoming weaknesses as a player and coming through for your team when they need you most are much more important qualities for a leader, neither of which he did much of through his career.

i think kobesachilles may be overstating his shortcomings a bit, as many of his playoff losses were simply a matter of losing to a clearly superior team. but there is plenty of truth to what he said, dude frequently crumbled in the clutch, and if he was more aggressive or had a stronger scoring skillset, perhaps they win one or two of those series, or at the very least being much more competitive in many of the ones they lost. they certainly had no business being swept by the mavs in 02. and most of the truly great players have led their team to an upset or two in their career. dirk definitely did on several occasions, Utah in 01, SA in 06, SA in 09, LA in 11

I would argue that KG's biggest strength had nothing to do with stats: being an elite defensive anchor and quarterback. People underrated the importance of having an elite defensive bigman that is vocal and directs the entire defense of a team by telling his teammates how to move and where to be.

[DAF86]

You’re missing the point. Had KG been a true franchise player he would’ve led the Wolves to a better REGULAR season record which gives you an easier match up. But KG the best he did was 2004. Besides that ONE year the best he did was the 5th seed (once) and 7th or 8th seed the other years. One of those years he got swept by Dirk, who averaged over 30 against his ass. My point of bringing up DRob was to compare KG to another player who was seen as a playoff choker except that even Robinson did better in the playoffs than KG. The Spurs made it to the second round numerous times.

Are you folks serious? :lol For years, the best Garnett had to work with was Wally fucking Szcerbiakghdgdhdk (or however that guy is called). On the toughest conference of all time (the early to mid 2000's West). It is almost a miracle the Wolves were a playoffs regular, tbh. Once he got a little help (and by "little", I mean literally "a little": past prime Sam alien looking motherfucker Casell and almost washed up Latrell Sprewel) he made it all the way to WCF.

BTW, "unclutch" Garnett pulled a 30-20 game in game 7 to get to that point.

K1VtZht_8t4

[Neo.]

I guess Shaq should have been closing out games like Superstars do instead of deferring to guys like Nick Anderson. Dirk > Shaq

See how retarded this "clutch" argument is? It seems as if you guys would hang on everything to try and make your case, tbh. :lol

literally stupid because the offense frequently still ran through Shaq in the clutch, and he was frequently ranked among the top "clutch" scorers in the league because he was so productive. you seem to think buzzer beating game winners are the only clutch shot. they arent.


I would argue that KG's biggest strength had nothing to do with stats: being an elite defensive anchor and quarterback. People underrated the importance of having an elite defensive bigman that is vocal and directs the entire defense of a team by telling his teammates how to move and where to be.

i dont disagree, but his minnesota teams were much more successful offensively than defensively.


Are you folks serious? :lol For years, the best Garnett had to work with was Wally fucking Szcerbiakghdgdhdk (or however that guy is called). On the toughest conference of all time (the early to mid 2000's West). It is almost a miracle the Wolves were a playoffs regular, tbh. Once he got a little help (and by "little", I mean literally "a little": past prime Sam alien looking motherfucker Casell and almost washed up Latrell Sprewel) he made it all the way to WCF.

literally untrue except for a year or two. and wally made an all-star team in the west. he was no slouch of a player. they regularly had very solid squads until after the WCF year.


BTW, "unclutch" Garnett pulled a 30-20 game in game 7 to get to that point.

K1VtZht_8t4

lol a career as long as his, and this is about the only truly memorable game where he put his team on his back

a great performance no question. but these werent the norm for him. it was more of the anomaly.

[DAF86]

literally stupid because the offense frequently still ran through Shaq in the clutch, and he was frequently ranked among the top "clutch" scorers in the league because he was so productive. you seem to think buzzer beating game winners are the only clutch shot. they arent.



i dont disagree, but his minnesota teams were much more successful offensively than defensively.



literally untrue except for a year or two. and wally made an all-star team in the west. he was no slouch of a player. they regularly had very solid squads until after the WCF year.



lol a career as long as his, and this is about the only truly memorable game where he put his team on his back

a great performance no question. but these werent the norm for him. it was more of the anomaly.

Garnett has a career average of 18.2 ppg and 10.7 rpg in the playoffs.

For comparisson's sake: Duncan, a similar style of player and one who was never acussed of not being clutch or not showing up for the playoffs, has a career average of 19 ppg and 10.8 rpg.

Garnett did just fine, individually, in the playoffs. He just never played in a good enough team so he lost more often than not, therefore folks started this choker narrative. Kinda like Lebron in Cleveland. The same fame Dirk had prior to 2011.

[KobesAchilles]

5 shots in a 12 years span. What's that suppossed to prove? :lol Garnett also had his share of clutch shots taken with the Celtics in a much shorter time span, tbh. Just because we can't remember every single one like we do with Spurs related material, it doesn't mean it didn't existed. In any case, with the 2 shots I showed while he was on the Celtics, he already matches your 5 in 12 years that Duncan took. KG played only 5 postseasons with the Celtics.
That's exactly what that means.

Where does Eric Dampier rank in your all time center list? top 100? 200? Probably not.
Where does Josh Howard rank in your SF list? What about Devin Harris as a point guard? Those were the bums Dirk took to the finals. You complain about Wally but Dirk had equally shitty teammates and took them waaay farther than Garnett did as a timberwolve. You just keep getting shit on and back up your stuff with zero evidence. The fact is that Dirk TWICE led a team to the finals without another all star on his team. He won the second one. How is Garnett the better franchise player when he never had the success as Dirk.

So Garnett led the C's? Not Pierce? Garnett was always the best player on the C's? 2008 is arguable between him and Pierce. 2009 he got hurt and by 2010 he was definitely not the best player on the Celtics team. Btw Garnett shot 37% in game 2 of the 2008 Finals and 28% in game 3. He had a better game 4 where he scored 18 in a balanced team win. But he followed it up with 13 points in game 5. He did step up in game 6 and was a monster in the 1st half. He helped blow the fuck out of the Lakers and that game was never even close thanks to him.

The fact is that you are talking out of your ass with Garnett. Comparing 2 game clutch moments to 5 and calling it the same thing because of what percentage? Well yeah I suppose if your just get rid of Duncan's 99,01,02,03,04 seasons then yes Garnett has the same percentage as Timmy. But you know that makes it 10/18 for Duncan which is 55% of the time the team went to him in crunch time. I mean what kind of idiot says Garnett is just as clutch as Tim Duncan. Beyond stupid. Take away your fan card. You don't know shit about the NBA hoss and apparently don't know shit about your own damn team

[KobesAchilles]

Garnett has a career average of 18.2 ppg and 10.7 rpg in the playoffs.

For comparisson's sake: Duncan, a similar style of player and one who was never acussed of not being clutch or not showing up for the playoffs, has a career average of 19 ppg and 10.8 rpg.

Garnett did just fine, individually, in the playoffs. He just never played in a good enough team so he lost more often than not, therefore folks started this choker narrative. Kinda like Lebron in Cleveland. The same fame Dirk had prior to 2011.
Nothing like them. At BEST you can say Kevin made it out of the 1st round twice as the man and 2008 I could argue he wasn't the man and Pierce was. Both Lebron and Dirk made it out of the 1st round multiple times as the man. Lebron also never missed the playoffs in his prime like Kevin did. And Dirk I think missed it in 2013 once when he was still kinda relevant but not really in his peak. You can only compare it really to Tmac.

Duncan played nothing like Garnett which is how I know you never saw the Wolves play. Duncan was bigger and stronger than Kevin and played only in the post. Garnett had some post moves but was easy to move out of the box and liked to settle for jumpers. Kevin had no go to move at the end of games. he had no killer instinct. His stats look good because he is a good player but he isn't a take over player. When he should be scoring he rebounds. When he should be taking over he defers to Wally. Duncan has way more playoff games than Garnett which is the only reason why the stats are close. It's easy to play great for 3 games as you're getting swept by the Mavericks (something he didn't do btw as Kevin was shitty in game 2), it's much harder playing great in later rounds and more brutal games. News flash, the competition gets harder the farther along you get, which I know Kevin Garnett didn't really know anything about that, so you can't tell me just because he averaged 25 points and 13 rebounds a game in 3 whole games in round one that means he would average that in round 2, CF, and the Finals. It's a ridiculous statement

[DAF86]

That's exactly what that means.

Where does Eric Dampier rank in your all time center list? top 100? 200? Probably not.
Where does Josh Howard rank in your SF list? What about Devin Harris as a point guard? Those were the bums Dirk took to the finals. You complain about Wally but Dirk had equally shitty teammates and took them waaay farther than Garnett did as a timberwolve. You just keep getting shit on and back up your stuff with zero evidence. The fact is that Dirk TWICE led a team to the finals without another all star on his team. He won the second one. How is Garnett the better franchise player when he never had the success as Dirk.

So Garnett led the C's? Not Pierce? Garnett was always the best player on the C's? 2008 is arguable between him and Pierce. 2009 he got hurt and by 2010 he was definitely not the best player on the Celtics team. Btw Garnett shot 37% in game 2 of the 2008 Finals and 28% in game 3. He had a better game 4 where he scored 18 in a balanced team win. But he followed it up with 13 points in game 5. He did step up in game 6 and was a monster in the 1st half. He helped blow the fuck out of the Lakers and that game was never even close thanks to him.

The fact is that you are talking out of your ass with Garnett. Comparing 2 game clutch moments to 5 and calling it the same thing because of what percentage? Well yeah I suppose if your just get rid of Duncan's 99,01,02,03,04 seasons then yes Garnett has the same percentage as Timmy. But you know that makes it 10/18 for Duncan which is 55% of the time the team went to him in crunch time. I mean what kind of idiot says Garnett is just as clutch as Tim Duncan. Beyond stupid. Take away your fan card. You don't know shit about the NBA hoss and apparently don't know shit about your own damn team

Your entire argument is based on the idea that Garnett wasn't the go to guy in the clutch to try and sell the narrative that he wasn't clearly the Celtics' best player in 2008, and I'm the one getting shit on with zero evidence? :lol

That's rich son. Even the other guys that are on the Dirk > KG side of the discussion agreed that Garnett was the Celtics' best player in 2008. You know who else agrees with this? The MVP voting list of that year that had Garnett at 3rd in the entire fucking league.

Look, you can think Dirk > KG all you want. It's pretty much a wash in my book. But don't come here trying to act like I'm not providing sound evidence while you come up with primary school level arguments like ":madrun but he doesn't take the last shot :madrun". :lol

[Neo.]

Garnett has a career average of 18.2 ppg and 10.7 rpg in the playoffs.

For comparisson's sake: Duncan, a similar style of player and one who was never acussed of not being clutch or not showing up for the playoffs, has a career average of 19 ppg and 10.8 rpg.

Garnett did just fine, individually, in the playoffs. He just never played in a good enough team so he lost more often than not, therefore folks started this choker narrative. Kinda like Lebron in Cleveland. The same fame Dirk had prior to 2011.

:lmao comparing timmy and kgs offensive skillset through ppg and rpg

yes, garnett did just fine for his level of ability. no one questioned that. and i personally dont agree with those who consider him a choker. why would i consider him a choker when hes not a truly great scorer to begin with?

kg on his own is an all-time great basketball player, with a great all-around game. the problem here is when you want to compare him to someone who's career accomplishments were more impressive, was a superior scorer, was superior in the clutch, was a superior leader, and has the results to back it all up.

[DAF86]

Nothing like them. At BEST you can say Kevin made it out of the 1st round twice as the man and 2008 I could argue he wasn't the man and Pierce was. Both Lebron and Dirk made it out of the 1st round multiple times as the man. Lebron also never missed the playoffs in his prime like Kevin did. And Dirk I think missed it in 2013 once when he was still kinda relevant but not really in his peak. You can only compare it really to Tmac.

Duncan played nothing like Garnett which is how I know you never saw the Wolves play. Duncan was bigger and stronger than Kevin and played only in the post. Garnett had some post moves but was easy to move out of the box and liked to settle for jumpers. Kevin had no go to move at the end of games. he had no killer instinct. His stats look good because he is a good player but he isn't a take over player. When he should be scoring he rebounds. When he should be taking over he defers to Wally. Duncan has way more playoff games than Garnett which is the only reason why the stats are close. It's easy to play great for 3 games as you're getting swept by the Mavericks (something he didn't do btw as Kevin was shitty in game 2), it's much harder playing great in later rounds and more brutal games. News flash, the competition gets harder the farther along you get, which I know Kevin Garnett didn't really know anything about that, so you can't tell me just because he averaged 25 points and 13 rebounds a game in 3 whole games in round one that means he would average that in round 2, CF, and the Finals. It's a ridiculous statement

Garnett averaged more points in conference semis, conference finals and league finals than in the first round.


You just keep getting shit on and back up your stuff with zero evidence

:lmao:lmao:lmao

[DAF86]

:lmao comparing timmy and kgs offensive skillset through ppg and rpg

yes, garnett did just fine for his level of ability. no one questioned that. and i personally dont agree with those who consider him a choker. why would i consider him a choker when hes not a truly great scorer to begin with?

Where in that post did I mention anything about offensive skillsets? I said "similar style" meaning that both were defensive minded PF's that weren't "scorers" per se. They would get their 20 a game because they were that good, but they were more all around players than just pure scorers ala Dirk.


kg on his own is an all-time great basketball player, with a great all-around game. the problem here is when you want to compare him to someone who's career accomplishments were more impressive, was a superior scorer, was superior in the clutch, was a superior leader, and has the results to back it all up.

I'm guessing you mean Duncan here.

[KobesAchilles]

Your entire argument is based on the idea that Garnett wasn't the go to guy in the clutch to try and sell the narrative that he wasn't clearly the Celtics' best player in 2008, and I'm the one getting shit on with zero evidence? :lol

That's rich son. Even the other guys that are on the Dirk > KG side of the discussion agreed that Garnett was the Celtics' best player in 2008. You know who else agrees with this? The MVP voting list of that year that had Garnett at 3rd in the entire fucking league.

Look, you can think Dirk > KG all you want. It's pretty much a wash in my book. But don't come here trying to act like I'm not providing sound evidence while you come up with primary school level arguments like ":madrun but he doesn't take the last shot :madrun". :lol
No my point is that Garnett lost in the first round 7 straight years. Went to the WCF once and missed the playoffs 3 straight years all in his prime. This didn’t happen to Dirk. It didn’t happen to Tim. It didn’t happen to Robinson. It didn’t happen to any of his contemporaries that he’s compared to. My other point is that shitty teammates isn’t a good enough excuse for Garnett to have failed so badly as a Timberwolves. Duncan made it to the second round with Antonio Daniels as the starting PG and Robinson averaging 4 points a game. His 2003 team blows away any argument that having shitty teammates is a good enough excuse to absolve KG’s failure. Dirk made it to the Finals with shitty teammates. Dampier was his starting center along with Harris as his PG. Robinson has Del Negro and AJ and made it to the WCF. Blaming KG’s teammates as the sole reason for why they failed and why he didn’t overcome us asinine. Just means he wasn’t as good as his peers that he’s placed in company with.

[KobesAchilles]

Your entire argument is based on the idea that Garnett wasn't the go to guy in the clutch to try and sell the narrative that he wasn't clearly the Celtics' best player in 2008, and I'm the one getting shit on with zero evidence? :lol

That's rich son. Even the other guys that are on the Dirk > KG side of the discussion agreed that Garnett was the Celtics' best player in 2008. You know who else agrees with this? The MVP voting list of that year that had Garnett at 3rd in the entire fucking league.

Look, you can think Dirk > KG all you want. It's pretty much a wash in my book. But don't come here trying to act like I'm not providing sound evidence while you come up with primary school level arguments like ":madrun but he doesn't take the last shot :madrun". :lol


Garnett averaged more points in conference semis, conference finals and league finals than in the first round.



:lmao:lmao:lmao
Just bc you say bullshit doesn’t make it true. He averaged 18 ppg in the finals in 08 and 15 ppg in ‘10. He averaged 20 points per game in the first round his 7 straight exits. I mean seriously you should get an award for how wrong a person can be in one argument

Also in 2008 he averaged 21 points per game in Round 1 vs Atlanta. Which is definitely less than 18 ppg he averaged in the finals and the 19 ppg he averaged in the semis :lol

[Spurtacular]

Top Fifty

1. Larry Bird
2. Tim Duncan
3. Lou Alcindor
4. Bill Russell
5. Len Bias
6. John Stockton
7. Wilt Chamberlain
8. Scottie Pippen
9. Pete Maravich
10. Moses Malone
11. Oscar Robertson
12. Julius Erving
13. Kevin McHale
14. Manu Ginobili
15. Hakeem Olajuwon
16. Kawhi Leonard
17. Karl Malone
18. David Robinson
19. Chris Webber
20. James Worthy
21. Shaquille O'Neal
22. Drazen Petrovic
23. Isiah Thomas
24. Kevin Garnett
25. Michael Jordan
26. Paul Pierce
27. John Havlicek
28. Lebron James
29. Reggie Lewis
30. Bill Walton
31. Robert Parish
32. Dirk Nowitzki
33. Pau Gasol
34. Charles Barkley
35. Steve Nash
36. Dominique Wilkins
47. Ralph Sampson
38. Peja Stojakovic
39. Grant Hill
40. Ray Allen
41. Clyde Drexler
42. Earvin Johnson
43. Vlade Divac
44. Kevin Durant
45. Alex English
46. Tracy McGrady
47. Kobe Bryant
48. Toni Kukoc
49. Bruce Bowen
50. Roy Tarpley
50. Rajon Rondo
50. Patrick Ewing
50. Tony Parker
50. Rick Barry
50. Jason Kidd
50. Dennis Johnson
50. Bill Laimbeer
50. Adrian Dantley
50. Bernard King
50. Chris Mullin
50. Shawn Marion
50. Jerry West

Okay, my bad for leaving Danny Ainge off the list.
Damn, this dude did one year of minor league baseball and three years of major league baseball all while playing college basketball for four years!

https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/players/danny-ainge-1.html
https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/a/aingeda01.shtml
https://www.baseball-reference.com/register/player.fcgi?id=ainge-001dan


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FBFW-4oE8tE

[lefty]

:lol baseball is not a sport tbh

[Spurtacular]

:lol baseball is not a sport tbh

Meh.

Either way Danny obviously sacrificed numbers and all star selections for the betterment of the team.
Even if he did shoot the C's out of the 85 Finals. :lol

[Neo.]

Where in that post did I mention anything about offensive skillsets? I said "similar style" meaning that both were defensive minded PF's that weren't "scorers" per se. They would get their 20 a game because they were that good, but they were more all around players than just pure scorers ala Dirk.

you were comparing their ability to be clutch and show up for the playoffs. comparable numbers don't equate to a comparable presence. timmy and dirk presences >>> kgs presence




I'm guessing you mean Duncan here.

so clever :toast

[Neo.]

Just bc you say bullshit doesn’t make it true. He averaged 18 ppg in the finals in 08 and 15 ppg in ‘10. He averaged 20 points per game in the first round his 7 straight exits. I mean seriously you should get an award for how wrong a person can be in one argument

Also in 2008 he averaged 21 points per game in Round 1 vs Atlanta. Which is definitely less than 18 ppg he averaged in the finals and the 19 ppg he averaged in the semis :lol

:lmao :lmao :lmao @ him just making up stuff to fit his agenda

like if he just prefers kg personally, that's one thing

but for him to state it as a fact that kg>dirk and then to claim he has proof but actually doesn't and instead resorts to making up lies? :rollin

[i'm_still_beta]

https://backpicks.com/2018/02/26/backpicks-goat-18-dirk-nowitzki/
https://backpicks.com/2018/03/19/backpicks-goat-8-kevin-garnett/

Great analysis for both players

[DAF86]

Just bc you say bullshit doesn’t make it true. He averaged 18 ppg in the finals in 08 and 15 ppg in ‘10. He averaged 20 points per game in the first round his 7 straight exits. I mean seriously you should get an award for how wrong a person can be in one argument

Also in 2008 he averaged 21 points per game in Round 1 vs Atlanta. Which is definitely less than 18 ppg he averaged in the finals and the 19 ppg he averaged in the semis :lol

Dude, Garnett averages 18.2 ppg in the playoffs for his career. On the conference semis, conference finals and NBA finals he averages 18.6 ppg combined. You do the remaining math.

[DAF86]

you were comparing their ability to be clutch and show up for the playoffs. comparable numbers don't equate to a comparable presence. timmy and dirk presences >>> kgs presence

Why? Because they had better teams and won more often? Sports is a world determined by circumstances and luck. I compared Garnett's numbers to Duncan's just to prove that, individually, Garnett did just as good as anyone. What's the difference? Team success. And, sorry to break it to you, but that's pretty much on team talent. There's only so much an individual can do.

Dumb, mind numbing narratives like calling a player a choker just because his team doesn't win, despite him doing good individually, should be over by 2020.

It's funny how untill 2010 Dirk was a soft jump shooting choker, but as soon as he got a great team around him he suddenly wasn't a choker anymore. Maybe he was never a choker and just didn't have good enough teams to go all the way.

Same shit with Garnett, years of losing early in the playoffs. As soon as he got some help around him, he's suddenly good enough to be the leading man on a championship team. Damn, Garnett must have done some serious soul searching and jedi level training in the 2007 offseason to go from 1st round fodder to championship leader, tbh.


so clever :toast

With the retarded shit I read on this thread I thought you might be referring to Dirk for a minutes.

[DAF86]

:lmao :lmao :lmao @ him just making up stuff to fit his agenda

like if he just prefers kg personally, that's one thing

but for him to state it as a fact that kg>dirk and then to claim he has proof but actually doesn't and instead resorts to making up lies? :rollin


Dude, Garnett averagd 18.2 ppg in the playoffs for his career. On the conference semis, conference finals and NBA finals he averaged 18.6 ppg combined. You do the remaining math.

Son, you should have stayed off his wagon as soon as you started reading arbitray qualifiers like "for his first 7 seasons" and "round 1 vs Atlanta".

[DAF86]

https://backpicks.com/2018/02/26/backpicks-goat-18-dirk-nowitzki/
https://backpicks.com/2018/03/19/backpicks-goat-8-kevin-garnett/

Great analysis for both players

Hey, KobesAchilles and Neo, you wanted "evidence", "stats" and "analysis"? Here you have the mother of all "evidences", "stats" and "analysis". It has Garnett a full 10 positions higher than Dirk. You can sign in and tell that dude how he just keeps getting shit on and backs up his stuff with zero evidence, and how KG wasn't really that good because he wasn't "clutch", tbh.

The premise and justification of the list:


What This List Is Not
This list will not make traditional “arguments” for players. I won’t attempt to balance Kobe’s championships without Shaq, nor do I care about accolades like All-Star teams or the number of Hall of Fame teammates someone played with. I also don’t care how many rings a player won; the very thing I’m trying to tease out is who provided the most lift. Sometimes that lift is good enough to win, sometimes it’s not.

There are no time machines either — it’s not about how players would do today if transported into the past or future. It’s about the impact each had in his own time over the course of a career.

What This List Is
This list also goes far beyond the box score — indeed, the box score is merely a reference for quantifying tendencies — so if you’re used to citing points per game and Win Shares, this will be a bit different.

Instead, this is a career-value, or CORP list; it ranks the players who have provided the largest increase in the odds of a team winning championships over the course of their careers. This means that having great Finals moments or winning the hearts of fans with innovative passes is irrelevant. You can make a great list with those criteria, but that’s not what this exercise is intended to be.

This list is really about evaluating players based on “goodness,” not merely situational value.

https://backpicks.com/2017/12/11/the-backpicks-goat-the-40-best-careers-in-nba-history/

So, basically, it just takes bias and circumstances out of the way and just focuses on a player's actual impact on a basketball court. You can agree or not, but it doesn't get much more clinical than that, tbh.

Quite an interesting site, tbh. Weird that I didn't heard about it 'till now.

[DAF86]

And would you believe it? Looking around on that page I saw this excerpt about Duncan and Garnett in the clutch:


A criticism often volleyed toward Kevin Garnett is his reluctance to take over games down the stretch. Of course, most bigs are hampered by this. And, with regards to his chief rival, Tim Duncan, KG’s clutch performance is quite similar. He’s nearly identical with TD over the last 8+ seasons, and outperformed him in his 3-year peak. Garnett actually shot it 21% more in his three-year peak (18.0 FGA’s per 36, 618 minute sample) than Duncan did in his (14.9 FGA’s per 36, 473 minute sample).

Still, in this generation it seems no big is going to rival a perimeter player in late-game performance.

https://elgee35.wordpress.com/tag/manu-ginobili/

But I'm sure the metrics experts here will find a way to explain why these analyses are shit and their eye tests are a better parameter.

[Neo.]

:lmao yes a GOAT list that places kg ahead of magic and bird, Russell ahead of Shaq, Hakeem, timmy and wilt, and LeBron ahead of Mike but behind Kareem has absolutely no flaws whatsoever and is the perfect parameter of greatness :lmao :lmao

You continue to apply narratives to me that I don't even claim or believe in. I never said kg is a choker, and I think it's a heavily overused label for many players. I simply said kg doesn't have the same level of scoring skills that guys like Dirk and Timmy have. and it shows come playoff time when you have to compete against the best defenses giving full effort every night
a big difference than regular seasons when you are facing teams that either completely suck defensively, don't care as much bc it's regular season, or both.

I fully agree that to an extent you can't always blame lack of team success on a single player, there's only so much he can do. but kg also had some pretty good teams that underachieved as well. and there were times that as the leader and best player on the team, his shortcomings at scoring were part of the reason his teams couldn't get over the hump. defenses simply didn't fear him the way they feared guys like dirk and timmy. I don't really consider it a fault, as much as it simply is something he wasn't capable of doing. ranking him lower than dirk isn't due to faults of kg, as opposed to simply having less capability of affecting the game the way dirk did. dirk literally transformed basketball. kg was basically a lesser version of hakeem.

truth is, kg was generally not on the level of a postseason performer that dirk was.

and it's funny how you want to say that the choker label is unfair to use (despite me never once using that label for kg), then conveniently want to apply it to dirk every chance you get :lmao

oh and then you want to criticize people for using what you referred to as the "eye test" but you conveniently want to use the eye test to claim that kg had no good teammates ever in minny, while dirk always was just surrounded by good talent. and then you want to conveniently ignore that kg won a championship with two hof teammates in their primes, while dirk won with a team that had no fellow allstars, nor a single player in the prime of their careers except maybe tyson.

i really couldn't care less if you simply prefer kg (I mean you consider manu one tier below MJ, LeBron and Timmy for goodness sake) I just don't get your inconsistent arguments. you keep jumping all over the place, making stuff up, and picking and choosing.

[KobesAchilles]

Son, you should have stayed off his wagon as soon as you started reading arbitray qualifiers like "for his first 7 seasons" and "round 1 vs Atlanta".
I mean those are his prime years. I was only counting his prime years and specifically his first round playoff numbers to his Finals numbers. You do realize that playoff numbers include his Nets years which I didn’t count bc then I would just say hey he averaged 6 points in the playoffs one season. Lol dirk never did. And then the response would be yeah when he’s out of his prime and on the Nets. So be careful if you want those numbers included.

Also and here’s a shocker, his playoff career numbers include his lower Finals numbers which lowers his playoff ppg average. And where THE FUCK did you see him average 18.6 points a game in the finals when he averaged less than that in 2008 and 15 ppg in 2010? 18+15=33. 33/2 is 16.5 ppg in the Finals. Like I said earlier just bc you say bullshit doesn’t make it true. Or do you not count his 2010 Finals for some reason but do include his Nets years?

[Neo.]

I mean those are his prime years. I was only counting his prime years and specifically his first round playoff numbers to his Finals numbers. You do realize that playoff numbers include his Nets years which I didn’t count bc then I would just say hey he averaged 6 points in the playoffs one season. Lol dirk never did. And then the response would be yeah when he’s out of his prime and on the Nets. So be careful if you want those numbers included.

Also and here’s a shocker, his playoff career numbers include his lower Finals numbers which lowers his playoff ppg average. And where THE FUCK did you see him average 18.6 points a game in the finals when he averaged less than that in 2008 and 15 ppg in 2010? 18+15=33. 33/2 is 16.5 ppg in the Finals. Like I said earlier just bc you say bullshit doesn’t make it true. Or do you not count his 2010 Finals for some reason but do include his Nets years?

to add to it, including his decrepit brooklyn season, it appears that his averages in the 2nd 3rd and 4th rounds combined actually are 17.9, not 18.6 as he claims

so since his career playoff average is 18.2, and his averages in rounds 2/3/4 are 17.9, that must mean his first round average is... well we can let him "do the remaining math"

:lmao at this guy literally making stuff up

[Dirks_Finale]

Why? Because they had better teams and won more often? Sports is a world determined by circumstances and luck. I compared Garnett's numbers to Duncan's just to prove that, individually, Garnett did just as good as anyone. What's the difference? Team success. And, sorry to break it to you, but that's pretty much on team talent. There's only so much an individual can do.

Dumb, mind numbing narratives like calling a player a choker just because his team doesn't win, despite him doing good individually, should be over by 2020.

It's funny how untill 2010 Dirk was a soft jump shooting choker, but as soon as he got a great team around him he suddenly wasn't a choker anymore. Maybe he was never a choker and just didn't have good enough teams to go all the way.

Same shit with Garnett, years of losing early in the playoffs. As soon as he got some help around him, he's suddenly good enough to be the leading man on a championship team. Damn, Garnett must have done some serious soul searching and jedi level training in the 2007 offseason to go from 1st round fodder to championship leader, tbh.
.

Dirk was 25/10, career, in the postseason. Karl Malone and Hakeem are the only other guys I know of to do that for the duration of a career. He always elevated his level of play in the postseason...lone exception being 07 when Nellie bombed on him :lol But I did not see that from KG in the playoffs. I saw him being passive in 4th quarters and giving up the rock to Trenton Hassell and Wally :lol

And I love KG...but that 08 C's team is one of the best I have seen. Towering over the 2011 Mavs in terms of talent. Just about anybody will look good playing next to Allen/Pierce/impactful Rondo and solid role players like Posey and Brown.

[TD 21]

The funny thing about Garnett-Nowitzki is this wasn't even considered a serious debate until they were past their primes and then all of a sudden people retroactively leaned Nowitzki.

Blame recency bias and the increasing tendency to apply modern basketball ideology ("closer") to yesteryear.

Sure, Garnett probably couldn't have pulled an '11 Nowitzki, but let's not make him out to be Mutombo, Wallace, Gobert, etc. either. There's a big difference between having a style suited to being an offensive hub for a championship caliber team and that and he veered far closer to the former than the latter.



Why? Because they had better teams and won more often? Sports is a world determined by circumstances and luck. I compared Garnett's numbers to Duncan's just to prove that, individually, Garnett did just as good as anyone. What's the difference? Team success. And, sorry to break it to you, but that's pretty much on team talent. There's only so much an individual can do.

Dumb, mind numbing narratives like calling a player a choker just because his team doesn't win, despite him doing good individually, should be over by 2020.

It's funny how untill 2010 Dirk was a soft jump shooting choker, but as soon as he got a great team around him he suddenly wasn't a choker anymore. Maybe he was never a choker and just didn't have good enough teams to go all the way.

Same shit with Garnett, years of losing early in the playoffs. As soon as he got some help around him, he's suddenly good enough to be the leading man on a championship team. Damn, Garnett must have done some serious soul searching and jedi level training in the 2007 offseason to go from 1st round fodder to championship leader, tbh.



With the retarded shit I read on this thread I thought you might be referring to Dirk for a minutes.

I agree with the sentiment, but despite Garnett's slightly superior regular season catch all metrics, what set Duncan apart was his low post game made him a championship caliber offensive hub, while Garnett's was always more suited to being complimentary at that level.

They were essentially Robinson-Olajuwon II.

[Neo.]

The funny thing about Garnett-Nowitzki is this wasn't even considered a serious debate until they were past their primes and then all of a sudden people retroactively leaned Nowitzki.

Blame recency bias and the increasing tendency to apply modern basketball ideology ("closer") to yesteryear.

Sure, Garnett probably couldn't have pulled an '11 Nowitzki, but let's not make him out to be Mutombo, Wallace, Gobert, etc. either. There's a big difference between having a style suited to being an offensive hub for a championship caliber team and that and he veered far closer to the former than the latter.


im pretty sure not one person here remotely suggested that whatsoever

[TD 21]

im pretty sure not one person here remotely suggested that whatsoever

The point is, if the argument for Nowitzki is he did the most important thing better, realize he didn't do it better by enough to supersede the massive gap in their all around games.

[Neo.]

The point is, if the argument for Nowitzki is he did the most important thing better, realize he didn't do it better by enough to supersede the massive gap in their all around games.

in your opinion perhaps

but he did something kg never did - put a team on his back and carry them to a championship. so perhaps he did do it better more than enough to supersede the gap in their all around games

its hard to argue against actual results

[TD 21]

in your opinion perhaps

but he did something kg never did - put a team on his back and carry them to a championship. so perhaps he did do it better more than enough to supersede the gap in their all around games

its hard to argue against actual results

You're making the common mistake people make in debates, which is acting as if the circumstances were the same.

When was Garnett ever in position to do what Nowitzki did in '11? '04 was the closest, but Cassell, their second best player, essentially missed the back half the WCF.

[Neo.]

You're making the common mistake people make in debates, which is acting as if the circumstances were the same.

When was Garnett ever in position to do what Nowitzki did in '11? '04 was the closest, but Cassell, their second best player, essentially missed the back half the WCF.

kg had plenty of decent talent for years and with the exception of the 04 year, never even got out the first round

on the other hand, when was nowitzki ever in position to have the talent garnett had from 08-12? yet kg only came out of it with 1 ring and 0 fmvps

[DAF86]

I mean those are his prime years. I was only counting his prime years and specifically his first round playoff numbers to his Finals numbers. You do realize that playoff numbers include his Nets years which I didn’t count bc then I would just say hey he averaged 6 points in the playoffs one season. Lol dirk never did. And then the response would be yeah when he’s out of his prime and on the Nets. So be careful if you want those numbers included.

Also and here’s a shocker, his playoff career numbers include his lower Finals numbers which lowers his playoff ppg average. And where THE FUCK did you see him average 18.6 points a game in the finals when he averaged less than that in 2008 and 15 ppg in 2010? 18+15=33. 33/2 is 16.5 ppg in the Finals. Like I said earlier just bc you say bullshit doesn’t make it true. Or do you not count his 2010 Finals for some reason but do include his Nets years?

I looked it up and did the math. Took me about 5 minutes. Do it and you will see. Or don't, but then shut the fuck up, tbh.

[TD 21]

kg had plenty of decent talent for years and with the exception of the 04 year, never even got out the first round

on the other hand, when was nowitzki ever in position to have the talent garnett had from 08-12? yet kg only came out of it with 1 ring and 0 fmvps

No, he didn't. '04 Cassell was the best player he played with as a Timberwolf and he strangely turned in a career season at 33-34. He never had so much as a top 15 player.

Nowitzki inarguably played with significantly more talent throughout their primes.

Had Garnett not injured his knee in '09, they probably go back-to-back and had Perkins not broken his leg and missed game 7 in '10, they easily could have won that too. Finals MVP is overblown. He was playoffs MVP in '08.

[Neo.]

No, he didn't. '04 Cassell was the best player he played with as a Timberwolf and he strangely turned in a career season at 33-34. He never had so much as a top 15 player.

what top 15 player did dirk ever have?


Nowitzki inarguably played with significantly more talent throughout their primes.

terry and howard > pierce and allen?

:lmao :lmao


Had Garnett not injured his knee in '09, they probably go back-to-back and had Perkins not broken his leg and missed game 7 in '10, they easily could have won that too. Finals MVP is overblown.

i dont disagree that they could have won more, but we could say plenty of coulda woulda stuff for dirk as well

had he not gotten injured in 03 they coulda beat the spurs
had the league not given stackhouse a weak suspension they probably win game 5
had cubes not dismantled the team in 11-12 they may have had a chance to win

we can do this all day. fact is, dirk put a team on his back in a way kg never did.


He was playoffs MVP in '08.

really? what award is that? never heard of it.

[DAF86]

:lmao yes a GOAT list that places kg ahead of magic and bird, Russell ahead of Shaq, Hakeem, timmy and wilt, and LeBron ahead of Mike but behind Kareem has absolutely no flaws whatsoever and is the perfect parameter of greatness :lmao :lmao

First, it doesn't have KG over Timmy. Duncan is 7th on the list.

Then, I didn't say it was perfect, I didn't even say I agreed with it. Simply that it is an interesting list that ranks players without any bias whatsoever. They just use a set of different metrics and whatever result they get, that's what they write. I don't agree with many things on the list, but I respect it and does make me consider some things.


You continue to apply narratives to me that I don't even claim or believe in. I never said kg is a choker, and I think it's a heavily overused label for many players. I simply said kg doesn't have the same level of scoring skills that guys like Dirk and Timmy have. and it shows come playoff time when you have to compete against the best defenses giving full effort every night
a big difference than regular seasons when you are facing teams that either completely suck defensively, don't care as much bc it's regular season, or both.

It shows on the playoffs by having Duncan averaging a mind blowing 0.8 pts more per game than Garnett.


I fully agree that to an extent you can't always blame lack of team success on a single player, there's only so much he can do. but kg also had some pretty good teams that underachieved as well. and there were times that as the leader and best player on the team, his shortcomings at scoring were part of the reason his teams couldn't get over the hump. defenses simply didn't fear him the way they feared guys like dirk and timmy. I don't really consider it a fault, as much as it simply is something he wasn't capable of doing. ranking him lower than dirk isn't due to faults of kg, as opposed to simply having less capability of affecting the game the way dirk did. dirk literally transformed basketball. kg was basically a lesser version of hakeem.

Less capability of affecting the game? Garnett is arguably the most complete bigman in history. He could affect the game in a lot more ways than Dirk. Dirk was unique with his skillset for a 7 footer, but his "game affecting" skills were solely limited to scoring.


truth is, kg was generally not on the level of a postseason performer that dirk was.

Yet, he has the same amount of hardware to show while spending most of his prime years in much lesser teams.


and it's funny how you want to say that the choker label is unfair to use (despite me never once using that label for kg), then conveniently want to apply it to dirk every chance you get :lmao

I never applied the choker label on Dirk. Not even when my war vs the mavkrew was it its peak (good times, tbh :lol). I'm just using Dirk as an example of mindless NBA fans going with the flow on empty narratives.


oh and then you want to criticize people for using what you referred to as the "eye test" but you conveniently want to use the eye test to claim that kg had no good teammates ever in minny, while dirk always was just surrounded by good talent. and then you want to conveniently ignore that kg won a championship with two hof teammates in their primes, while dirk won with a team that had no fellow allstars, nor a single player in the prime of their careers except maybe tyson.

Did you read the analysis on that website? They came up with a non-arbitrary way of determining the level of a player's supporting cast.


I really couldn't care less if you simply prefer kg (I mean you consider manu one tier below MJ, LeBron and Timmy for goodness sake) I just don't get your inconsistent arguments. you keep jumping all over the place, making stuff up, and picking and choosing.

There's nothing contradictory or inconsistent about my arguments. My main argument here is that players are perceived according to the circumstances they fall in, rather than their actual level of play.

If I say that Manu is a better player than Allen Iverson because Manu does literally everything better than Iverson on a basketball court (seriously: shooting, rebounding, blocking, defense, clutchness, making smart decisions, leadership, you name it) people laugh at me because Iverson won NBA MVP and Manu was a 6th man.

This is the same, if I say that KG is better than Dirk becasue he had a bigger impact on games (proved by metrics) some folks Will argue with me because he lost a lot in the first round and didn't have a "killer instect" or "eye of the tiger" or whatever other corny phrase they want to come up with.

[DAF86]

to add to it, including his decrepit brooklyn season, it appears that his averages in the 2nd 3rd and 4th rounds combined actually are 17.9, not 18.6 as he claims

so since his career playoff average is 18.2, and his averages in rounds 2/3/4 are 17.9, that must mean his first round average is... well we can let him "do the remaining math"

:lmao at this guy literally making stuff up

Link? I personally did the math myself. I have no problem to admit if I commited a mistake.

[Neo.]

First, it doesn't have KG over Timmy. Duncan is 7th on the list.

obviously reading isnt your strong suit as i didnt say that. i said russell was ahead of tim


Then, I didn't say it was perfect, I didn't even say I agreed with it. Simply that it is an interesting list that ranks players without any bias whatsoever. They just use a set of different metrics and whatever result they get, that's what they write. I don't agree with many things on the list, but I respect it and does make me consider some things.

what proof do you have that there is no bias?

if you dont agree with it, then why bother to try to use it as some sort of conclusive proof that kg > dirk? :lmao


It shows on the playoffs by having Duncan averaging a mind blowing 0.8 pts more per game than Garnett.

so that means garnett is about as skilled as timmy?


Less capability of affecting the game? Garnett is arguably the most complete bigman in history. He could affect the game in a lot more ways than Dirk. Dirk was unique with his skillset for a 7 footer, but his "game affecting" skills were solely limited to scoring.

yet dirk was the one who is viewed as transcendent, and a guy who completely changed the way basketball is played in the nba

obviously his one way of affecting the game was much bigger than all of kgs


Yet, he has the same amount of hardware to show while spending most of his prime years in much lesser teams.

some of his prime years

then some of them he spent with 2-3 hof players in their primes and only has 1 ring to show for it


I never applied the choker label on Dirk. Not even when my war vs the mavkrew was it its peak (good times, tbh :lol). I'm just using Dirk as an example of mindless NBA fans going with the flow on empty narratives.

lol ok



Did you read the analysis on that website? They came up with a non-arbitrary way of determining the level of player's supporting cast.

:lmao of course its non-arbitrary when it fits your opinion


There's nothing contradictory or inconsistent about my arguments. My main argument here is that players are perceived according to the circumstances they fall in, rather than their actual level of play.

If I say that Manu is a better player than Allen Iverson because Manu does literally everything better than Iverson on a basketball court (seriously, shooting, rebounding, blocking, defense, clutchness, making smart decisions, leadership, you name it) people laugh at me because Iverson won NBA MVP and Manu was a 6th man.

This is the same, if I say that KG is better than Dirk becasue he had a bigger impact on games (proved by metrics) some folks Will argue with me because he lost a lot in the first round and didn't have a "killer instect" or "eye of the tiger" or whatever other corny phrase they want to come up with.

i dont disagree about circumstances, but in the end, you can only prove what actually happened. its the same reason that no matter how much people want to argue it, mike will continue to be greater than lebron, despite all the arguments for bron being a better basketball player

dirk had a more impressive career than kg, plain and simple. he changed the league and put a team on his back to win a ring. kg did neither of those.

[Neo.]

Link? I personally did the math myself. I have no problem to admit if I commited a mistake.

go do the math and you will realize you failed miserably at it

[KobesAchilles]

I looked it up and did the math. Took me about 5 minutes. Do it and you will see. Or don't, but then shut the fuck up, tbh.
Then explain how he has 18.8 ppg in the finals? Show your work. I did. He averaged 18 in 08 and 15 in ‘10. I don’t see how that equals 18.8 ppg. And since you have no problem admitting that you’re wrong just say I was wrong and KG didn’t have a finals scoring average of 18.8

[TD 21]

what top 15 player did dirk ever have?



terry and howard > pierce and allen?

:lmao :lmao



i dont disagree that they could have won more, but we could say plenty of coulda woulda stuff for dirk as well

had he not gotten injured in 03 they coulda beat the spurs
had the league not given stackhouse a weak suspension they probably win game 5
had cubes not dismantled the team in 11-12 they may have had a chance to win

we can do this all day. fact is, dirk put a team on his back in a way kg never did.



really? what award is that? never heard of it.

Nash's last few seasons as a Maverick were about that level, but the likes of Finley and even Terry were clearly better secondary options than what Garnett had as a Timberwolf.

I wasn't basing it off just the 2nd and 3rd best players at a particular point, genius. I meant depth of talent.

Nah, but the difference is, they destroyed the Lakers in '08 and were still better than them in '09. There's every reason to believe they repeat. '10, I'd actually argue the Lakers win either way, but the Celtics needed Perkins against them more than any other team.

Even the NHL is smart enough to realize 4 rounds are greater than 1.

[DAF86]

go do the math and you will realize you failed miserably at it

I just did again. Still getting the same results. Now I would like to know your source.

[DAF86]

Then explain how he has 18.8 ppg in the finals? Show your work. I did. He averaged 18 in 08 and 15 in ‘10. I don’t see how that equals 18.8 ppg. And since you have no problem admitting that you’re wrong just say I was wrong and KG didn’t have a finals scoring average of 18.8

I didn't say he averaged 18.8 ppg on the finals. I said that in the finals, the conference finals, and conference semis combined, he had a combined average of 18.6. which is higher than his Carrer playoffs and therefore it is also higher than his first round average.

[DAF86]

what proof do you have that there is no bias?

Did you read the article?


if you dont agree with it, then why bother to try to use it as some sort of conclusive proof that kg > dirk? :lmao

You and the other dude were the ones that wanted evidential proof that KG > Dirk. Well it doesn't get any more detailed than that, tbh.


so that means garnett is about as skilled as timmy?

Garnett is arguably the most skilled bigman ever, which it isn't the same as saying he's the best bigman ever, tbh.


yet dirk was the one who is viewed as transcendent, and a guy who completely changed the way basketball is played in the nba

And Garnett isn't viewed as a transcendent player? :lol The dude was a fucking unicorn when he came out of high school. You are showing some lack of memory son.


obviously his one way of affecting the game was much bigger than all of kgs

Says who? What did Dirk accomplished so far ahead of KG in the NBA to say that it was "obviously much bigger"?



some of his prime years

then some of them he spent with 2-3 hof players in their primes and only has 1 ring to show for it

2008 he won it all. 2009 Celtics didn't repeat because Garnett got injured. 2010 Celtics would have won if not for Perkins getting injured. From then on, bye prime. So, Garnett made the most out of the only prime injury free year he had of playing with a good team.


:lmao of course its non-arbitrary when it fits your opinion

It's not arbitrary because it uses mathematical analysis. I guess you could say the way to come up with the formulas can be considered arbitrary. Still, is a lot more objective than going "obviously his one way of affecting the game was much bigger".


I dont disagree about circumstances, but in the end, you can only prove what actually happened. its the same reason that no matter how much people want to argue it, mike will continue to be greater than lebron, despite all the arguments for bron being a better basketball player

dirk had a more impressive career than kg, plain and simple. he changed the league and put a team on his back to win a ring. kg did neither of those.

And I say, KG did both. See? That's why a list like the one on that blog has more merits than a simple "your word vs mine" argument.

[Neo.]

Nash's last few seasons as a Maverick were about that level, but the likes of Finley and even Terry were clearly better secondary options than what Garnett had as a Timberwolf

sam cassell and spree were multiple time all-stars. terrell brandon was a multiple time all star. wally made an all star team. stephon marbury obviously made some all-star teams. he also had chauncey billups a couple seasons who went on to make many all-star teams.

jason terry never made a single all-star game, so i dont see how you can say he was clearly superior to all of these guys who made multiple all-star teams


I wasn't basing it off just the 2nd and 3rd best players at a particular point, genius. I meant depth of talent.

he had plenty of solid contributors as well through those years, such as joe smith, kendall gill, anthony peeler, rasho, candiman, laphonso ellis, gary trent. they all were more than average role players, several of them being 15+ ppg scorers on other teams, in addition to the aforementioned all-star players


Nah, but the difference is, they destroyed the Lakers in '08 and were still better than them in '09. There's every reason to believe they repeat.

whos to say that even with KG, they beat a red-hot magic squad?

coulda woulda shoulda

[Neo.]

I just did again. Still getting the same results. Now I would like to know your source.

basketball reference. and some simple addition and division. not that hard. well apparently for you it is.


Did you read the article?

i did. i saw nothing to prove theres no bias.


You and the other dude were the ones that wanted evidential proof that KG > Dirk. Well it doesn't get any more detailed than that, tbh.

i actually never once asked for evidential proof that kg > dirk

originally, i was simply stating that its debatable that he was "by far" the best player on the 08 celtics team, and disproved your claim that in his prime he was putting up the same kind of scoring numbers dirk was putting up


Garnett is arguably the more skilled bigman ever, which it isn't the same as saying he's the best bigman ever, tbh.

lol i want some of what youre smokin


And Garnett isn't viewed as a transcendent player? :lol The dude was a fucking unicorn when he came out of high school. You are showing some lack of memory son.

youthful hype doesnt make you transcendent. he was great, but nothing the league had never seen before. i suppose one could consider him transcendent, but he certainly didnt have the effect on the game of basketball that dirk did. not even close.


Says who? What did Dirk accomplished so far ahead of KG in the NBA to say that it was "obviously much bigger"?

he actually put a team on his back, overcame tough competition and odds, and won a championship as the unquestioned best player and leader of his team


2009 Celtics didn't repeat because Garnett got injured

no guarantee they win with him


2010 Celtics would have won if not for Perkins getting injured

no guarantee they win with perkins

but hey, theres another interesting aspect. the excuse that an injury to a mediocre center was what prevented KG from winning it all. yet in 2011 dirk lost his #2 scorer in caron butler for the season, and in the finals they lost brendan haywood. yet they still went out there and won. :toast to dirk for overcoming injuries, which apparently kg cant do


It's not arbitrary because it uses mathematical analysis. I guess you could say the way to come up with the formulas can be considered arbitrary. Still, is a lot more objective than going "obviously his one way of affecting the game was much bigger".

well you are literally doing the same thing by saying the ways kg affects a game are much bigger. lol at your double standards.


And I say, KG did both. See? That's why a list like the one on that blog has more merits than a simple "your word vs mine" argument.

so exactly how did KG change basketball?

[KobesAchilles]

Here are KG’s stats. I suppose I can choose shitty Garnett stats too like his Nets years but his resume sucks enough as is. 7 first round exits :lol 3 straight years of missing the playoffs in his prime :lol

These are his 1st round averages
97. He averaged 17.3
98: 15.8
99: 21.8
00: 18.8
01: 21
02: 24
03: 27
04: 25
05: 0 ppg in playoffs :lol
06: 0 ppg in playoffs :lol
07: 0 ppg in playoffs :lol
08: 21
10: 15.8
12: 18.7

These are his Semi final averages
04 SF: 23.9
08: 19.6
10: 18.8
12: 19.7
So far he is 50% in averaging more on the second round than the 1st round.

He does much better in the CF though. When KG gets there, he comes to play. Except 2010. He was trash there.
2004 WCF: 23.7
Close out game 6 he had 4 points in the 4th quarter and deferred to Sprewell
2008 ECF: 22.8
He showed up big in the 4th of close out game 6 but still deferred to Pierce to close out the game.
2010 ECF: 10.3
He didn’t show up at all in close out Game 6. He had zero points in the 4th quarter and let Pierce take over the game. Even Perkins had more 4th quarter points than Garnett
2012 ECF: 19.1
He choked in game 7. He had 14 points well under his average of 19 and 2 points in the 4th quarter which is a theme with Garnett only this time Pierce didn’t come to his rescue.

He’s 50/50 here too. Still didn’t match his career playoff series high like in the 1st round but mostly impressive nonetheless. Kevin Garnett is a stat stuffer but when you dive deep you find what I said. He defers in the 4th to others. He scores well until crunch time when he wants no part of the ball. In his biggest moments where the pressure is the most, Garnett shrinks. You can’t just look at stats. You have to dive deeper. 2 points in the 4th isn’t gonna cut it. Neither is zero points or 4 points. These are moments where stars are supposed to step up but he never really did.

[DAF86]

Here are KG’s stats. I suppose I can choose shitty Garnett stats too like his Nets years but his resume sucks enough as is. 7 first round exits :lol 3 straight years of missing the playoffs in his prime :lol

These are his 1st round averages
97. He averaged 17.3
98: 15.8
99: 21.8
00: 18.8
01: 21
02: 24
03: 27
04: 25
05: 0 ppg in playoffs :lol
06: 0 ppg in playoffs :lol
07: 0 ppg in playoffs :lol
08: 21
10: 15.8
12: 18.7

These are his Semi final averages
04 SF: 23.9
08: 19.6
10: 18.8
12: 19.7
So far he is 50% in averaging more on the second round than the 1st round.

He does much better in the CF though. When KG gets there, he comes to play. Except 2010. He was trash there.
2004 WCF: 23.7
Close out game 6 he had 4 points in the 4th quarter and deferred to Sprewell
2008 ECF: 22.8
He showed up big in the 4th of close out game 6 but still deferred to Pierce to close out the game.
2010 ECF: 10.3
He didn’t show up at all in close out Game 6. He had zero points in the 4th quarter and let Pierce take over the game. Even Perkins had more 4th quarter points than Garnett
2012 ECF: 19.1
He choked in game 7. He had 14 points well under his average of 19 and 2 points in the 4th quarter which is a theme with Garnett only this time Pierce didn’t come to his rescue.

He’s 50/50 here too. Still didn’t match his career playoff series high like in the 1st round but mostly impressive nonetheless. Kevin Garnett is a stat stuffer but when you dive deep you find what I said. He defers in the 4th to others. He scores well until crunch time when he wants no part of the ball. In his biggest moments where the pressure is the most, Garnett shrinks. You can’t just look at stats. You have to dive deeper. 2 points in the 4th isn’t gonna cut it. Neither is zero points or 4 points. These are moments where stars are supposed to step up but he never really did.

Dude, just take the total of pts scored in the first round and divide them by the number of games played. Then do the same with the pts and games of rounds 2, 3 and 4 and you get your results. It is not rocket science.

[DAF86]

basketball reference. and some simple addition and division. not that hard. well apparently for you it is.

Total of pts scored in rounds 2, 3 and 4 of the playoffs: 1046
Total of games played in those rounds: 56

1046 % 56 = 18.67


I did. i saw nothing to prove theres no bias.

I guess mathematical formulas are biased now.


I actually never once asked for evidential proof that kg > dirk

originally, i was simply stating that its debatable that he was "by far" the best player on the 08 celtics team, and disproved your claim that in his prime he was putting up the same kind of scoring numbers dirk was putting up

That's actually less of a debate than the KG/Dirk one.


lol i want some of what youre smokin

Which other bigman you know that could do as many things as Garnett, all at such a high level? The dude even played Point guard for stretches.


youthful hype doesnt make you transcendent. he was great, but nothing the league had never seen before. i suppose one could consider him transcendent, but he certainly didnt have the effect on the game of basketball that dirk did. not even close.

Nothing the league hadn't seen before? :lol

Tell me, how many 7 footers chasing around opposing perimeter players did you see before and after Garnett? Also, how many 7 footers playing PG?


he actually put a team on his back, overcame tough competition and odds, and won a championship as the unquestioned best player and leader of his team

So did Garnett.


No guarantee they win with him

no guarantee they win with perkins

OK, fair enough. No guarantee of either of those things. The fact still remains that in Garnett's only prime season with that team, he rang.


well you are literally doing the same thing by saying the ways kg affects a game are much bigger. lol at your double standards.

The difference is that advanced metrics actually back up my point.


so exactly how did KG change basketball?

Already said it. Unlimited defensive range. 7 footer playing PG. One of the greatest 20 players of all-time.

[KobesAchilles]

Dude, just take the total of pts scored in the first round and divide them by the number of games played. Then do the same with the pts and games of rounds 2, 3 and 4 and you get your results. It is not rocket science.
But there's no context that way. My way shows you that he basically always did better in the 1st round than the later rounds. Also it shows you what a major complaint about KG is and his clutchness and crunch time play in high pressure games. it's easy to see that he averaged 23 ppg but how many in the 4th? Does he rise to the occasion of big games or does he kind of whimper. KG is the type of player that when things are going good then KG will do fine but when there's any type of resistance or any bad momentum or just a need for a big play, he won't show up. When KG loses he goes out with a whimper in the Conference Finals. And that's KG in a nutshell. When guards want to fight him he's all in their face acting tough, when other bigs go after him he runs away. When the going gets tough for KG, he folds

[140]

Tell me, how many 7 footers chasing around opposing perimeter players did you see before and after Garnett? Also, how many 7 footers playing PG?


Already said it. Unlimited defensive range. 7 footer playing PG. One of the greatest 20 players of all-time.

:lmao

[Neo.]

Total of pts scored in rounds 2, 3 and 4 of the playoffs: 1046
Total of games played in those rounds: 56

1046 % 56 = 18.67



and where exactly did you get 56 games from? I see 75 games played in those rounds.


I guess mathematical formulas are biased now.

they absolutely can be. but not everything he did was based on math. much was based on his personal observations of video. so yes there is plenty of room for bias.


Thats actually less of a debate than the KG/Dirk one.

its actually not.


Which other bigman you know that could do as many things as Garnett, all at such a high level? The dude even played Point guard for stretches.

hakeem and ad quickly come to mind, both of whom are easily more skilled than kg. but that wasn't even what was being talked about. the comparison was his scoring skillset to Timmy scoring skillset. not comparable, Timmy blows him out of the water


Nothing the league hadn't seen before? :lol

Tell me, how many 7 footers chasing around opposing perimeter players did you see before and after Garnett? Also, how many 7 footers playing PG?

hakeem was pretty capable of those things. and let's not overrate kgs perimeter proficiency, he was good for a big man but certainly not someone you WANT running point or guarding the tony parker's of the world. it certainly wasn't anything like how dirk changed the fact that the league now basically requires at least big man on each team to shoot 3s effectively and have some sort of perimeter skills.


So did Garnett.

then he would have won finals mvp. he didn't.


OK, fair enough. No guarantee of either of those things. The fact still remains that in Garnett's only prime season with that team, he rang.

kudos to him, I was very happy that he did


The difference is that advanced metrics actually back up my point.

to a degree. but to some degree they don't, they actually favor dirk in ways


Already said it. Unlimited defensive range. nope, otherwise he wouldn't have gotten ate up by dirk virtually every time they played


7 footer playing PG

decently, not proficiently.


One of the greatest 20 players of all-time.

I don't disagree necessarily, but I thought you only post unbiased facts backed up with math?

[DAF86]

But there's no context that way. My way shows you that he basically always did better in the 1st round than the later rounds. Also it shows you what a major complaint about KG is and his clutchness and crunch time play in high pressure games. it's easy to see that he averaged 23 ppg but how many in the 4th? Does he rise to the occasion of big games or does he kind of whimper. KG is the type of player that when things are going good then KG will do fine but when there's any type of resistance or any bad momentum or just a need for a big play, he won't show up. When KG loses he goes out with a whimper in the Conference Finals. And that's KG in a nutshell. When guards want to fight him he's all in their face acting tough, when other bigs go after him he runs away. When the going gets tough for KG, he folds

Goal post moving much? :lol

This whole thing started because you said that the only reason KG had a similar pppg average to Duncan in the playoffs was because KG played mostly first rounds and that first rounds were easier (ignoring the fact that, the Wolves being usually lower seeds often played the best teams in the first round :lol), so that's why Garnett's ppg were inflated. Well, I proved to you that Garnett avergaed more ppg in the later rounds than in the first. That's the only context I needed to debunk your extremely flawed argument.

[Spurtacular]

Top Fifty

1. Larry Bird
2. Tim Duncan
3. Lou Alcindor
4. Bill Russell
5. Len Bias
6. John Stockton
7. Wilt Chamberlain
8. Scottie Pippen
9. Pete Maravich
10. Moses Malone
11. Oscar Robertson
12. Julius Erving
13. Kevin McHale
14. Manu Ginobili
15. Hakeem Olajuwon
16. Kawhi Leonard
17. Karl Malone
18. David Robinson
19. Chris Webber
20. James Worthy
21. Shaquille O'Neal
22. Drazen Petrovic
23. Isiah Thomas
24. Kevin Garnett
25. Michael Jordan
26. Paul Pierce
27. John Havlicek
28. Lebron James
29. Reggie Lewis
30. Bill Walton
31. Robert Parish
32. Dirk Nowitzki
33. Pau Gasol
34. Charles Barkley
35. Steve Nash
36. Dominique Wilkins
47. Ralph Sampson
38. Peja Stojakovic
39. Grant Hill
40. Ray Allen
41. Clyde Drexler
42. Earvin Johnson
43. Vlade Divac
44. Kevin Durant
45. Alex English
46. Tracy McGrady
47. Kobe Bryant
48. Toni Kukoc
49. Bruce Bowen
50. Roy Tarpley
50. Rajon Rondo
50. Patrick Ewing
50. Tony Parker
50. Rick Barry
50. Jason Kidd
50. Dennis Johnson
50. Bill Laimbeer
50. Adrian Dantley
50. Bernard King
50. Chris Mullin
50. Shawn Marion
50. Jerry West
50. Danny Ainge

The list don't lie, tbh.

[DAF86]

and where exactly did you get 56 games from? I see 75 games played in those rounds.

I did the math. 56 games played between 2nd round, conference finals and NBA finals. 13 with the Wolves, 43 with the Celtics. I don't know where you got 75.


they absolutely can be. but not everything he did was based on math. much was based on his personal observations of video. so yes there is plenty of room for bias.

Ok, I can concede that. You still have to respect the fact that is one of the most statistically detailed rankings out there. Of the ones I've seen, is by far the best in that regard. You can agree or not but you have to respect the amount of work put into it. On a debate tournament that ranking trumps any other thing I've read.


its actually not.

It is. The KG/Dirk debate is a close one and even I, being on KG's side, can understand a person arguing for Dirk. KG not being the Celtics best player in 2008 is completely ignorant and I have zero tolerance for such level of stupidity. I already proved to you, with evidence, that Garnett in 2008 had a much more dominant season than most others championship winners that were considered the undisputed alphas of their respective teams.

Saying that KG wasn't head and shoulders the Celtics best player throughout both the regular season and playoffs is like saying Duncan wasn't the Spurs best player in 2007 or Curry for GS in 2015 because they didn't win finals MVP. Actually, Duncan didn't finish 3rd in MVP voting in 2007, so it's actually worse to say that KG wasn't the Celtics best player in 2008, than to say Duncan wasn't the Spurs best player in 2007.


hakeem and ad quickly come to mind, both of whom are easily more skilled than kg. but that wasn't even what was being talked about. the comparison was his scoring skillset to Timmy scoring skillset. not comparable, Timmy blows him out of the water

When did Hakeem and AD played perimeter defense or played PG? And I would argue that Duncan had more strength than KG to bully people inside. It wasn't so much a difference of skills.


hakeem was pretty capable of those things. and let's not overrate kgs perimeter proficiency, he was good for a big man but certainly not someone you WANT running point or guarding the tony parker's of the world. it certainly wasn't anything like how dirk changed the fact that the league now basically requires at least big man on each team to shoot 3s effectively and have some sort of perimeter skills.

I would argue that it was the rule changes, more than Dirk, that forced teams to play smallball.

You want to talk about a guy that trully influnced a change in the NBA? Manu fucking Ginobili. There you trully have a game changer regardless of rule modifications. Eurostep, flooping, no-midrange inefficiency. A guy ahead of his time. But not because of that I'm going to say that he's better than players that didn't change shit but were in fact better. Being a trend setter doesn't make you a better player.


then he would have won finals mvp. he didn't.

I guess Curry wasn't the unquestioned best player of the Warriors in 2015.


kudos to him, I was very happy that he did

Yet you say he only has 1 ring to show by playing with 2 other Hall of famers. Well, no shit he has only one ring, he only played one season in his prime with those guys. :lol


to a degree. but to some degree they don't, they actually favor dirk in ways

In what "degrees" do they favour Dirk?


nope, otherwise he wouldn't have gotten ate up by dirk virtually every time they played

If by getting eaten alive you mean 23 ppg on lower than normal efficiency. I guess, sure, Dirk ate KG alive.

https://www.landofbasketball.com/games_between/kevin_garnett_vs_dirk_nowitzki.htm#:~:text=They%20 faced%20each%20other%20a,3-0%20record%20in%20Playoffs.


decently, not proficiently.

He did it. Thing that no other 7 footer in history did.


I don't disagree necessarily, but I thought you only post unbiased facts backed up with math?

KG being a top 20 player is backed up by pretty much any math out there, tbh.

[FrostKing]

I like that 2008 Celtic team. But if they were so great why were they getting pushed to the brink by the hawks :lol
2008 Hawks were talented but very young. 3 starters 22 aged or younger.

[Dirks_Finale]

I think the reason they were pushed to the brink is because they were still learning how to win. 1st yr together and KG was never known as clutch performer/closer.


2008 Hawks were talented but very young. 3 starters 22 aged or younger.

[FrostKing]

I think the reason they were pushed to the brink is because they were still learning how to win. 1st yr together and KG was never known as clutch performer/closer.
KG had a strong but not Dirk quality long jumper and his other offensive move was the tip in. I'm being harsh. Once KG stopped driving to the basket with a jump stop, he was no longer a #1 on Title team. Garnet developed into hall of fame defender so I tip hat

[i'm_still_beta]

3 vs 1, so I'll take my friend's DAF86 side.

Why when we use term "clutch" we include only scoring into equation? Winning important rebounds isn't clutch? Pass out of double-team to wide-open teammate who than makes extra pass to another guy (minus assist in boxscore for real playmaker) who sinks open jumper or scores easy layup isn't clutch? Is latter worse than chucking contested low-percantage jumper?

My point is, we can't give too much weight to scoring ability. One player scores 20 points and gives up 22, another scores 15 but allowes only 10. Who is more valuable?

Iirc (if I wrong I'm sorry) in 2011 run and during his career Dirk was often subbed out of games in clutch situations when Mavs needed crucial defensive stops. Why don't we critisize him for this? He literally had zero value at that moments.
If one player was better by a solid margin during first 43 minutes and another was only better for 5 minutes (and it questionable) how can we rank second player higher? I know how (meaning I know what my opponents in this debate'll tell me) and I disagree with it. The answer is narratives and winning bias.

Basketball is much much bigger than boxscore. In fact pre-assists can be more important than assists. Great at the rim shot contests without blocks don't get mentioned in boxscore and etc.
KG had elite passing, elite horizontal defensive game, elite awareness on both ends of the court. And you can see his extremely high value and impact in his elite box and non-box advanced stats where he absolutely destroys Dirk. He doesn't get called "King of all box and non-box" metrics for nothing.

His minor team success can be explained by the fact that he played in historically bad teams. Kobe at least had Lamar Odom. In fact the only time he had ok help in Minnesota he was close to taking down 3-peat Lakers team. And even than Sam Cassel possibly had series-altering injury.
During his Celtics days he won title when he finally had great team around in 2008 and then KG had career-altering injury in 2009. He was never the same after that. He was the guy who was bullying Pau Gasol in 2008 and became the guy who was bullied by Pau Gasol in 2010. Pure speculation from my part but if not for that injury Celtics would at least 3-peated and who knows how much more could they win after that. Big 3 was getting older but Rondo was entering his prime. Debatable, controversial but possible. Anyway bad luck is a bad luck. Magic was smart to avoid playing for Bulls. If he played for them who knows how his legacy would looked like today. KG and Magic are prime examples of how luck can change the way you're getting perceived by fans and media.

Backpick's GOAT aka Thinking Basketball aka Ben Taylor has made titanic work and imho it's hands-down the best analysis on player's rankings I've ever read. It measures only pure player impact, not narratives and team success. And KG ranked higher than Magic because he was better more impacful player with better longevity. It's controversial for most fans but exactly what I see on tape (KG was just more impactful 2-way player).

This video perfectly encapsuletes what I mean by terms like "winning bias", "narratives", "non-boxscore impact".
Y21CX8zrCgA

Instead of trashing his list for no reason, I highly recommend to look througly Mr Taylor's work. It's deserves respect.

Also about KG defenive impact. Don't forget what happened in Boston under Thibodeau :)


This wasn’t a dominant defensive team (2004 Timberwolves), but such heights were unlikely under Flip Saunders without another star defender next to KG.
An example of Flip’s offensive preferences: When Saunders took over in Detroit in 2006, the Pistons were coming off of an all-time level ’04 season and an ’05 rDRtg 5.4 points better than league average when healthy.
In 2006, with the same starting five all in their prime, that number dropped to 3.1 as the offense exploded.

DAF86 also gave Tim's and KG's numbers in clutch time. Nothing to add here.

In summary, no way I'm trying to tell that I'm better at ranking players. In fact, it quite possible that it's me who is mistaken. But it's my point of view at this moment.
It's shame that smart posters don't exposed to a 5-star restaurant-level basketball analysis like Backpicks, but instead to fast food level like First Take and Undisputed.

[FrostKing]

Webber pre knee injury

[TD 21]

sam cassell and spree were multiple time all-stars. terrell brandon was a multiple time all star. wally made an all star team. stephon marbury obviously made some all-star teams. he also had chauncey billups a couple seasons who went on to make many all-star teams.

jason terry never made a single all-star game, so i dont see how you can say he was clearly superior to all of these guys who made multiple all-star teams



he had plenty of solid contributors as well through those years, such as joe smith, kendall gill, anthony peeler, rasho, candiman, laphonso ellis, gary trent. they all were more than average role players, several of them being 15+ ppg scorers on other teams, in addition to the aforementioned all-star players



whos to say that even with KG, they beat a red-hot magic squad?

coulda woulda shoulda

Looking back, outside of '04 Cassell, only Brandon was truly an All-Star caliber player among them, yet never made it as a Timberwolf.

Terry has a strong argument for being better than the rest (at least while they were Timberwolves).

The Mavericks perennially had a bloated payroll, filled with players who previously pilled up counting stats on mediocre-bad teams.

The Celtics matched up well with the Magic, I believe dominated them head to head and beat them the next season, when the former were slightly past their collective prime.

[Neo.]

I did the math. 56 games played between 2nd round, conference finals and NBA finals. 13 with the Wolves, 43 with the Celtics. I don't know where you got 75.

well your math sucks because he clearly played the following games:

wcs 04 vs sac - 7 games 167 points
wcf 04 vs lakers - 6 games 142 points
ecs 08 vs cle - 7 games 137 points
ecf 08 vs det - 6 games 137 points
fin 08 vs lakers - 6 games 109 points
ecs 10 vs cle - 6 games 113 points
ecf 10 vs orl - 6 games 62 points
fin 10 vs lakers - 7 games 107 points
ecs 11 vs mia - 5 games 72 points
ecs 12 vs phi - 7 games 138 points
ecf 12 vs mia - 7 games 134 points
ecs 14 vs mia - 5 games 24 points

7+6+7+6+6+6+6+7+5+7+7+5= 75 games
167+142+137+137+109+113+62+107+72+138+134+24= 1342 points
1342/75= 17.89 ppg

it really wasnt that difficult. looks like you left out 2012 and 2014. figures, anything to fit your narrative.


Ok, I can concede that. You still have to respect the fact that is one of the most statistically detailed rankings out there. Of the ones I've seen, is by far the best in that regard. You can agree or not but you have to respect the amount of work put into it. On a debate tournament that ranking trumps any other thing I've read.

i never said anything about not respecting the work. you are taking this way too personally for some reason. all of it. it literally began as something much smaller than this, and youve turned it into a whine-fest of "oh why doesnt everyone agree with my non-biased fact based opinions" and claiming i view kg as a choker when i never once said he was a choker, and repeatedly have said i dont believe he was a choker. my main claim this whole time is that he had a limited scoring skillset compared to other elite PFs in his time, such as dirk and tim.

my original issue was him being "by far" the best player on the 08 celtics. i agreed he was the best player on the team. i dont personally feel he was "by far", and plenty of the advanced stats you like to use so much would agree.

the other issue was that in his prime he put up the same scoring numbers as dirk. he absolutely did not. stats proved that pretty easily.

i also pointed out the fact that you gave false stats and dont seem to comprehend simple addition and division.

the rest of this is just pointless back and forth that neither one of us are going to change our minds on and i dont care to waste time on anymore. you prefer kg. i prefer dirk. kg was a better all around player, while dirk was a more unguardable scorer. they had many comparable accolades. kg had a nice playoff run where his team won a championship. dirk had one of the most impressive playoff runs in nba history and won a championship. these are all the facts. end of story.

oh, and you think that manu is only one tier below michael jordan in terms of greatest players ever :lmao

[Neo.]

Webber pre knee injury

tbh very underappreciated player

if he didnt get hurt they most likely win the championship in 02-03

[lefty]

tbh very underappreciated player

if he didnt get hurt they most likely win the championship in 02-03

or you know

2002*

[Dirks_Finale]

KG in 22 seasons- 191.4 Win shares.

Dirk in 21 seasons- 206.3 Win shares.

One player was more impactful than the other. That''s all I have ever claimed. Love KG but Dirk has a slight edge on him.

[Dirks_Finale]

2002 WCF officiating was nearly as bad as 2006 NBA Finals


or you know

2002*

[Dirks_Finale]

Terry had a few great games in the 2011 Finals and then suddenly the history books were re-written on him :lol

JET was a bonehead. Constantly out of place and missing defensive assignments. Turnovers at the worst possible times. Streaky shooter ,so if he's cold that means Dirk gets no help and needs to drop 40 for them to have any shot at winning. Oh, and that big mouth of his also got us into trouble too often.

Wally was steady in his prime. Not somebody KG should be deferring to in the 4th like he always did, but could give you 15-20 on a consistent basis with solid percentages. They were actually better than JET's, tbh.


Looking back, outside of '04 Cassell, only Brandon was truly an All-Star caliber player among them, yet never made it as a Timberwolf.

Terry has a strong argument for being better than the rest (at least while they were Timberwolves).

The Mavericks perennially had a bloated payroll, filled with players who previously pilled up counting stats on mediocre-bad teams.

The Celtics matched up well with the Magic, I believe dominated them head to head and beat them the next season, when the former were slightly past their collective prime.

[Neo.]

KG in 22 seasons- 191.4 Win shares.

Dirk in 21 seasons- 206.3 Win shares.

One player was more impactful than the other. That''s all I have ever claimed. Love KG but Dirk has a slight edge on him.

it is interesting how some people want to use advanced stats to prove kg > dirk, but want to dismiss the ones that clearly favor dirk and strongly suggest that his offensive advantages over kg noticeably outweighs kgs advantages on defense, as many people feel and see without even needing to look at advanced stats :dizzy

[Neo.]

Terry had a few great games in the 2011 Finals and then suddenly the history books were re-written on him :lol

JET was a bonehead. Constantly out of place and missing defensive assignments. Turnovers at the worst possible times. Streaky shooter ,so if he's cold that means Dirk gets no help and needs to drop 40 for them to have any shot at winning. Oh, and that big mouth of his also got us into trouble too often.

Wally was steady in his prime. Not somebody KG should be deferring to in the 4th like he always did, but could give you 15-20 on a consistent basis with solid percentages. They were actually better than JET's, tbh.

tbh jet was beyond amazing in the 05 and 06 playoffs. losing the finals in 06 got in his head and he pretty much was playoff-retarded until 2011 playoffs. literally every series they lost until 2011, could have been won if jet wasnt so horrible lol

[Dirks_Finale]

tbh jet was beyond amazing in the 05 and 06 playoffs. losing the finals in 06 got in his head and he pretty much was playoff-retarded until 2011 playoffs. literally every series they lost until 2011, could have been won if jet wasnt so horrible lol

Yeah, forgot about that run. He was nice that year.

[DAF86]

well your math sucks because he clearly played the following games:

wcs 04 vs sac - 7 games 167 points
wcf 04 vs lakers - 6 games 142 points
ecs 08 vs cle - 7 games 137 points
ecf 08 vs det - 6 games 137 points
fin 08 vs lakers - 6 games 109 points
ecs 10 vs cle - 6 games 113 points
ecf 10 vs orl - 6 games 62 points
fin 10 vs lakers - 7 games 107 points
ecs 11 vs mia - 5 games 72 points
ecs 12 vs phi - 7 games 138 points
ecf 12 vs mia - 7 games 134 points
ecs 14 vs mia - 5 games 24 points

7+6+7+6+6+6+6+7+5+7+7+5= 75 games
167+142+137+137+109+113+62+107+72+138+134+24= 1342 points
1342/75= 17.89 ppg

it really wasnt that difficult. looks like you left out 2012 and 2014. figures, anything to fit your narrative.



i never said anything about not respecting the work. you are taking this way too personally for some reason. all of it. it literally began as something much smaller than this, and youve turned it into a whine-fest of "oh why doesnt everyone agree with my non-biased fact based opinions" and claiming i view kg as a choker when i never once said he was a choker, and repeatedly have said i dont believe he was a choker. my main claim this whole time is that he had a limited scoring skillset compared to other elite PFs in his time, such as dirk and tim.

my original issue was him being "by far" the best player on the 08 celtics. i agreed he was the best player on the team. i dont personally feel he was "by far", and plenty of the advanced stats you like to use so much would agree.

the other issue was that in his prime he put up the same scoring numbers as dirk. he absolutely did not. stats proved that pretty easily.

i also pointed out the fact that you gave false stats and dont seem to comprehend simple addition and division.

the rest of this is just pointless back and forth that neither one of us are going to change our minds on and i dont care to waste time on anymore. you prefer kg. i prefer dirk. kg was a better all around player, while dirk was a more unguardable scorer. they had many comparable accolades. kg had a nice playoff run where his team won a championship. dirk had one of the most impressive playoff runs in nba history and won a championship. these are all the facts. end of story.

oh, and you think that manu is only one tier below michael jordan in terms of greatest players ever :lmao

In which way am I taking it too personal? :lol

I'm just arguing ball on a sports message board, just like you. Explain how am I taking it more personal than you or any other guy in here? :lol Besides I'm arguing in favour of a player that I couldn't care less about. You, on the other hand, I bet, are a Mavs fan.

[Neo.]

In which way am I taking it too personal? :lol

I'm just arguing ball on a sports message board, just like you. Explain how am I taking it more personal than you or any other guy in here? :lol Besides I'm arguing in favour of a player that I couldn't care less about. You, on the other hand, I bet, are a Mavs fan.

whining about people not respecting statisticians, whining im calling kg a choker when i didnt, and resorting to making up false or incomplete stats to fit your narrative :lmao :lmao :lmao

[DAF86]

whining about people not respecting statisticians, whining im calling kg a choker when i didnt, and resorting to making up false or incomplete stats to fit your narrative :lmao :lmao :lmao

Where did I whine, tbh? :lol

If you consider, what I'm doing, whining, then I guess you consider you are whining too, tbh. :lol

[FrostKing]

Judging the list OP created,

Hakeem over Moses but both near the top

1. Dr.J
2. Oscar
3. West
4. Curry (will move up)

Forward. This part is quite difficult.
Barkley vs Malone
Dirk vs Durant

[ElNono]

Kobe certainly in this range... but lol @ KG being top 20... and why is a choker like Malone being rewarded? he was basically a product of Stockton...

[DMC]

3 vs 1, so I'll take my friend's DAF86 side.

Why when we use term "clutch" we include only scoring into equation? Winning important rebounds isn't clutch? Pass out of double-team to wide-open teammate who than makes extra pass to another guy (minus assist in boxscore for real playmaker) who sinks open jumper or scores easy layup isn't clutch? Is latter worse than chucking contested low-percantage jumper?

My point is, we can't give too much weight to scoring ability. One player scores 20 points and gives up 22, another scores 15 but allowes only 10. Who is more valuable?

Iirc (if I wrong I'm sorry) in 2011 run and during his career Dirk was often subbed out of games in clutch situations when Mavs needed crucial defensive stops. Why don't we critisize him for this? He literally had zero value at that moments.
If one player was better by a solid margin during first 43 minutes and another was only better for 5 minutes (and it questionable) how can we rank second player higher? I know how (meaning I know what my opponents in this debate'll tell me) and I disagree with it. The answer is narratives and winning bias.

Basketball is much much bigger than boxscore. In fact pre-assists can be more important than assists. Great at the rim shot contests without blocks don't get mentioned in boxscore and etc.
KG had elite passing, elite horizontal defensive game, elite awareness on both ends of the court. And you can see his extremely high value and impact in his elite box and non-box advanced stats where he absolutely destroys Dirk. He doesn't get called "King of all box and non-box" metrics for nothing.

His minor team success can be explained by the fact that he played in historically bad teams. Kobe at least had Lamar Odom. In fact the only time he had ok help in Minnesota he was close to taking down 3-peat Lakers team. And even than Sam Cassel possibly had series-altering injury.
During his Celtics days he won title when he finally had great team around in 2008 and then KG had career-altering injury in 2009. He was never the same after that. He was the guy who was bullying Pau Gasol in 2008 and became the guy who was bullied by Pau Gasol in 2010. Pure speculation from my part but if not for that injury Celtics would at least 3-peated and who knows how much more could they win after that. Big 3 was getting older but Rondo was entering his prime. Debatable, controversial but possible. Anyway bad luck is a bad luck. Magic was smart to avoid playing for Bulls. If he played for them who knows how his legacy would looked like today. KG and Magic are prime examples of how luck can change the way you're getting perceived by fans and media.

Backpick's GOAT aka Thinking Basketball aka Ben Taylor has made titanic work and imho it's hands-down the best analysis on player's rankings I've ever read. It measures only pure player impact, not narratives and team success. And KG ranked higher than Magic because he was better more impacful player with better longevity. It's controversial for most fans but exactly what I see on tape (KG was just more impactful 2-way player).

This video perfectly encapsuletes what I mean by terms like "winning bias", "narratives", "non-boxscore impact".
Y21CX8zrCgA

Instead of trashing his list for no reason, I highly recommend to look througly Mr Taylor's work. It's deserves respect.

Also about KG defenive impact. Don't forget what happened in Boston under Thibodeau :)



DAF86 also gave Tim's and KG's numbers in clutch time. Nothing to add here.

In summary, no way I'm trying to tell that I'm better at ranking players. In fact, it quite possible that it's me who is mistaken. But it's my point of view at this moment.
It's shame that smart posters don't exposed to a 5-star restaurant-level basketball analysis like Backpicks, but instead to fast food level like First Take and Undisputed.

Sorry, but you can explain away almost any narrative. Harden didn't have any issue scoring shit tons until pressure time. He didn't switch gears because CP3 was dominant, he deferred. That's what he's accused of.

[TD 21]

Terry had a few great games in the 2011 Finals and then suddenly the history books were re-written on him :lol

JET was a bonehead. Constantly out of place and missing defensive assignments. Turnovers at the worst possible times. Streaky shooter ,so if he's cold that means Dirk gets no help and needs to drop 40 for them to have any shot at winning. Oh, and that big mouth of his also got us into trouble too often.

Wally was steady in his prime. Not somebody KG should be deferring to in the 4th like he always did, but could give you 15-20 on a consistent basis with solid percentages. They were actually better than JET's, tbh.

Nah, he was better than you think. Go back and look at his catch all advanced metrics. With the rise of them, he'd be more appreciated today, similar to Williams.

Szczerbiak was nowhere near the same caliber of player.

I don't want to hear this All-Star/awards nonsense. To encapsulate just how circumstantial and arbitrary they are, DeRozan has made 4 All-Star teams, 2 All-NBA (1 2nd team), an Olympic and World Cup team . . . yet his teams have perennially been significantly better with him off the floor.



it is interesting how some people want to use advanced stats to prove kg > dirk, but want to dismiss the ones that clearly favor dirk and strongly suggest that his offensive advantages over kg noticeably outweighs kgs advantages on defense, as many people feel and see without even needing to look at advanced stats :dizzy

It's not just offense/initial defense. Garnett was a significantly better passer and rebounder, too.

The only things Nowitzki had on him was shot creation/range shooting, which he also did well.

[i'm_still_beta]

Well, win shares is team dependent stat, meaning that player perfoming for 65-win team would always have higher mark over player with exactly the same production but who's perfoming for 50-win team for example. So, no surprise here.
In majority of advanced stats that don't have such limitation like vorp or bpm KG is comfortably ahead.

About putting his team on the back to the title. One player lost in 1-round while avareging 27.0 ppg 15.7 rpg 5.2 apg 1.7 spg 1.7 bpg on 51.4 fg% (53.7 ts%) againts Kobe's and Shaq's Lakers. Another won Finals MVP with 26.0 ppg 9.7 rpg
2.0 apg 0.7 spg 0.7 bpg on 41.6 fg% (53.7 ts) (he wasn't even best player in that series, DWade was).

KG was good, not great scorer (he had great turnaround jumpers, good mid-range jumpers, good post game that included up and unders, fakes, spins and hooks, he is not Tyson Chandler how you could think while reading this thread lol),
elite passer, defender and rebounder.

Dirk was elite scorer, below average passer, above average rebounder and average defender.
Defense and rebounding are very important for power forward.

One could argue that you don't have to dig into advanced or traditional stats to understand that KG is more impactful player just from eye-test.

And if you'll still decide to do it you can see that Dirk's ppg, apg and ts% numbers are not out of this world or transcendent and he is known for nothing outside of it.

In the end in 1964-1965 season Bill Russell wasn't leading scoring for the Celtics. He averaged 14.1 ppg in reg season and 16.5 in postseason, while Sam Jones's averaged 25.9 and 28.6 respectively. Russell was still the best player on that team.

[Dirks_Finale]

Ok, I'll take JET over Derozan any day. So you have a point there. But I think Wally is better than you are crediting him for. Look at his FG% and 3-fg %...higher than Jet's.


Nah, he was better than you think. Go back and look at his catch all advanced metrics. With the rise of them, he'd be more appreciated today, similar to Williams.

Szczerbiak was nowhere near the same caliber of player.

I don't want to hear this All-Star/awards nonsense. To encapsulate just how circumstantial and arbitrary they are, DeRozan has made 4 All-Star teams, 2 All-NBA (1 2nd team), an Olympic and World Cup team . . . yet his teams have perennially been significantly better with him off the floor.




It's not just offense/initial defense. Garnett was a significantly better passer and rebounder, too.

The only things Nowitzki had on him was shot creation/range shooting, which he also did well.

[Dirks_Finale]

In this modern game, Dirk would be less dominant as so many bigs have range and can put the ball on the floor some... But in his day, he completely changed the game, constantly forcing teams to go small or get killed for it. The spacing he caused opened things up for everyone around him. Pulling bigs from the basket all the way out to the 3 point line made bums like Devin Harris look good. :lol He was a nightmare matchup and that's why I see him as more valuable than KG, overall. In the 4th quarter of games KG was dishing off to Trenton Hassell with 3 seconds left on the shot clock :lol Good for your fantasy team but not so much for the Twolves.


Well, win shares is team dependent stat, meaning that player perfoming for 65-win team would always have higher mark over player with exactly the same production but who's perfoming for 50-win team for example. So, no surprise here.
In majority of advanced stats that don't have such limitation like vorp or bpm KG is comfortably ahead.

About putting his team on the back to the title. One player lost in 1-round while avareging 27.0 ppg 15.7 rpg 5.2 apg 1.7 spg 1.7 bpg on 51.4 fg% (53.7 ts%) againts Kobe's and Shaq's Lakers. Another won Finals MVP with 26.0 ppg 9.7 rpg
2.0 apg 0.7 spg 0.7 bpg on 41.6 fg% (53.7 ts) (he wasn't even best player in that series, DWade was).

KG was good, not great scorer (he had great turnaround jumpers, good mid-range jumpers, good post game that included up and unders, fakes, spins and hooks, he is not Tyson Chandler how you could think while reading this thread lol),
elite passer, defender and rebounder.

Dirk was elite scorer, below average passer, above average rebounder and average defender.
Defense and rebounding are very important for power forward.

One could argue that you don't have to dig into advanced or traditional stats to understand that KG is more impactful player just from eye-test.

And if you'll still decide to do it you can see that Dirk's ppg, apg and ts% numbers are not out of this world or transcendent and he is known for nothing outside of it.

In the end in 1964-1965 season Bill Russell wasn't leading scoring for the Celtics. He averaged 14.1 ppg in reg season and 16.5 in postseason, while Sam Jones's averaged 25.9 and 28.6 respectively. Russell was still the best player on that team.

[Neo.]

Well, win shares is team dependent stat, meaning that player perfoming for 65-win team would always have higher mark over player with exactly the same production but who's perfoming for 50-win team for example. So, no surprise here.
In majority of advanced stats that don't have such limitation like vorp or bpm KG is comfortably ahead.

okay, lets just set the record straight on some of these advanced stats so we can move on from them

first, your claim about the win shares being dependents on the number of wins isnt entirely true. you can lose a lot of games and still have a very high ws/48. for example in 03-04, when the mavs lost to the kings in 5 games, dirk put up a ws/48 of .287, which was the highest of any player in the playoffs that year, because he was so dominant in that series despite his team being horribly outmatched.

now lets look at the actual advanced stats

regular season careers
ws/48
dirk - .193 (+.011)
kg - .182

total ws
dirk - 206.3 (+14.9)
kg - 191.4

bpm
dirk - 4.5
kg - 5.6 (+1.1)

vorp
dirk - 84.8
kg - 96.9 (+12.1)

ortg/drtg differential
dirk - +12 (+1)
kg - +11

per
dirk - 22.4
kg - 22.7 (+0.3)

so for their regular season careers, they are very close in most categories, and pretty much cancel each other out with notable differences in two categories (dirk in ws, kg in vorp). both had great careers and proved quite valuable to their teams during the regular season, racking up lots of wins.

now lets see the playoff stats
ws/48
dirk - .188 (+.039)
kg - .149

total ws
dirk - 23.1 (+6.7)
kg - 16.4

bpm
dirk - 5.9 (+0.8)
kg - 5.1

vorp
dirk - 11.8 (+2.4)
kg - 9.4

ortg/drtg differential
dirk - +10 (+4)
kg - +6

per
dirk - 23.8 (+2.7)
kg - 21.1

so come playoffs, dirk beats kg in literally every single one of these categories

for people to claim kg is so much better in so many facets of basketball, its odd that these stats clearly favor dirks value in the playoffs when facing top notch competition

either dirks offensive value just far outweighs kgs values in other aspects of basketball, or perhaps kg simply isnt that far ahead of dirk in those aspects. no question kgs a better defender, but dirk was at least passable on defense, a very underrated rebounder, and his exceptionally low turnover rate for a scorer like himself is underappreciated a lot too.

[Spurtacular]

2002 WCF officiating was nearly as bad as 2006 NBA Finals

They were both bad; but :lol at you pretending 2006 was worse, homer.

[Dirks_Finale]

They were both bad; but :lol at you pretending 2006 was worse, homer.

From GM 4 on, if you got within 3 feet of Dwhistle it was a foul.

[Spurtacular]

From GM 4 on, if you got within 3 feet of Dwhistle it was a foul.

You're not gonna find a non Mavs fan who agrees with you on 06 being worse than 02. Not gonna happen.

[i'm_still_beta]

okay, lets just set the record straight on some of these advanced stats so we can move on from them

first, your claim about the win shares being dependents on the number of wins isnt entirely true. you can lose a lot of games and still have a very high ws/48. for example in 03-04, when the mavs lost to the kings in 5 games, dirk put up a ws/48 of .287, which was the highest of any player in the playoffs that year, because he was so dominant in that series despite his team being horribly outmatched.

now lets look at the actual advanced stats

regular season careers
ws/48
dirk - .193 (+.011)
kg - .182

total ws
dirk - 206.3 (+14.9)
kg - 191.4

bpm
dirk - 4.5
kg - 5.6 (+1.1)

vorp
dirk - 84.8
kg - 96.9 (+12.1)

ortg/drtg differential
dirk - +12 (+1)
kg - +11

per
dirk - 22.4
kg - 22.7 (+0.3)

so for their regular season careers, they are very close in most categories, and pretty much cancel each other out with notable differences in two categories (dirk in ws, kg in vorp). both had great careers and proved quite valuable to their teams during the regular season, racking up lots of wins.

now lets see the playoff stats
ws/48
dirk - .188 (+.039)
kg - .149

total ws
dirk - 23.1 (+6.7)
kg - 16.4

bpm
dirk - 5.9 (+0.8)
kg - 5.1

vorp
dirk - 11.8 (+2.4)
kg - 9.4

ortg/drtg differential
dirk - +10 (+4)
kg - +6

per
dirk - 23.8 (+2.7)
kg - 21.1

so come playoffs, dirk beats kg in literally every single one of these categories

for people to claim kg is so much better in so many facets of basketball, its odd that these stats clearly favor dirks value in the playoffs when facing top notch competition

either dirks offensive value just far outweighs kgs values in other aspects of basketball, or perhaps kg simply isnt that far ahead of dirk in those aspects. no question kgs a better defender, but dirk was at least passable on defense, a very underrated rebounder, and his exceptionally low turnover rate for a scorer like himself is underappreciated a lot too.

Well

KG was elite MVP-caliber player from 2000-2008 (in 2000 all-nba teamer and all-star for first time, 2nd in MVP voting, 3rd in MVP voting in 2008)
Dirk was elite MVP-caliber player from 2002-2011 (in 2002 all-nba teamer and all-star simulteniously for 1st time, Fiba World Cup MVP, 6th in MVP voting in 2011 )
Both were the same age at 23

Their stats in the playoffs in those years:
KG - 61 games 22.3 ppg 12.8 rpg 4.5 apg 1.4 spg 1.5 bpg 2.9 tpg 47.1% fg and 51.5 ts%
Dirk - 114 games 26.1 ppg 10.6 rpg 2.7 apg 1.1 spg 1.0 bpg 2.4 tpg 46.7% fg and 58.5 ts%

other stats:
KG - 24.5 per; 28,7 usage rate; 0.175 ws/per48, 6.9 bpm and 5.6 vorp (counting stat, more game ->higher value)
Dirk - 25.0 per; 27.3 usage rate; 0.207 ws/per48, 6.7 bpm and 10.3 vorp

Total career playoffs games: KG-143 Dirk-145. First guy played 43% of games as superstar player, second 79%. KG from 2002-2006, his best years, played just 27 games in 5 seasons (5,4 games per year). It prevented him from increasing his stats. All of it should be taken into account when you're comparing their playoffs careers.

Some observations:
1. KG had usage of 28.3 even higher than Dirk. While it's flawed stat and Dirk was more impactful and active on offense, it's still shows that KG wasn't disappearing in the playoffs (you didn't tell it Neo, but others did);
2. They had quite similar stats (win shares favours players on better teams, per favours offensive players, while some adv. stats are designed in favour of player like KG). KG also played 36% of games less as an elite player in postseason.

Because of all these combined factors ^, I don't see that Dirk's superior offense gives him advantage in impact over KG's versatility. It looks like they had similar overall impact but in different way. It also looks like Dirk's team success can be attributed for playing for superior franchise and they're should be ranked next to each other in no particular order.

[Spurtacular]

Well

KG was elite MVP-caliber player from 2000-2008 (in 2000 all-nba teamer and all-star for first time, 2nd in MVP voting, 3rd in MVP voting in 2008)
Dirk was elite MVP-caliber player from 2002-2011 (in 2002 all-nba teamer and all-star simulteniously for 1st time, Fiba World Cup MVP, 6th in MVP voting in 2011 )
Both were the same age at 23

KG was elite in 2009 pre-injury and would've been presumably much better 09-12 had that not occurred.
I give Dirk 2012, too w/o the benefit of looking at stats. He didn't drop that much in a year.
Fact is Mavs would've been challenging for a repeat if Cuban hadn't cheaped out on signing Chandler.
I don't know the NBA financials, but with all that revenue sharing sh** it's entirely possible that Cuban was going to make more money with the Heat winning going forward.
And if not, I don't put it past Stern to do backroom deals either to incentivize him.

[Kyle_Kuzma]

swap Hakeem and Kobe imo

11. Oscar
12. Kobe
13. Curry
14. Dr. J
15. Moses
16. Garnett
17. D. Robinson
18. Nowitzki
19. Barkley
20. Durant

swap that virginia slims on yo mouth with muh dick and tell
me how that taste like

[TD 21]

Ok, I'll take JET over Derozan any day. So you have a point there. But I think Wally is better than you are crediting him for. Look at his FG% and 3-fg %...higher than Jet's.

So? Terry had more creative ability and responsibility, which meant more pull up attempts.

They were both good shooters and sub par defenders, but Terry was the superior creator/play maker and had longevity.

[Spurtacular]

30. Bill Walton



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_uGW8cXalzw

[Spurtacular]

5. Len Bias
25. Michael Jordan


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ehzuq42wB88

[i'm_still_beta]

Shame that Walton was injured.

Bias could help to extend Celtics sucess straight through the late 90s.

[lefty]

Walton gave kareem the business

[i'm_still_beta]

Walton gave kareem the business

Kareem gave Bill the business :tongue

[KobesAchilles]

Real question. Where do you rank the Admiral? Peak for peak I think he’s one of the greatest players ever but career wise he did fall shorter than original expectations. Some of that is bad luck, lots of injuries to himself and teammates, bad front office hiring 6 coaches in 5 years, and people forget we were robbed 2 more excellent years because of his commitment to the Navy. If Robinson has 2 more years like his rookie year (which seems plausible) I think he would be ranked so much higher than he is now

[Spurtacular]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SJmJypQupP0

"How Danny Ainge is not in the Hall of Fame player is beyond me."
"Danny Ainge was an elite player who took a subservient role for the sake of winning."

Tell 'em, Bill.

[Spurtacular]

25. Michael Jordan


:lol

Yea, I know there's a case that he's not top 25.
He couldn't shoot the three very well.
He may be the most over-rated defender of all-time besides Kobe.
There was about six fake fouls called for him every game.
He never won a championship that wasn't handed to him.

But he was quite athletic and skilled and probably in that 20-30 range.

[lefty]

Yea, I know there's a case that he's not top 25.
He couldn't shoot the three very well.
He may be the most over-rated defender of all-time besides Kobe.
There was about six fake fouls called for him every game.
He never won a championship that wasn't handed to him.

But he was quite athletic and skilled and probably in that 20-30 range.
True true

[Dirks_Finale]

:lol



Yea, I know there's a case that he's not top 25.
He couldn't shoot the three very well.
He may be the most over-rated defender of all-time besides Kobe.
There was about six fake fouls called for him every game.
He never won a championship that wasn't handed to him.

But he was quite athletic and skilled and probably in that 20-30 range.

[FkLA]

KG > Dirk

[Dirks_Finale]

Real question. Where do you rank the Admiral? Peak for peak I think he’s one of the greatest players ever but career wise he did fall shorter than original expectations. Some of that is bad luck, lots of injuries to himself and teammates, bad front office hiring 6 coaches in 5 years, and people forget we were robbed 2 more excellent years because of his commitment to the Navy. If Robinson has 2 more years like his rookie year (which seems plausible) I think he would be ranked so much higher than he is now

Most list have him at about 30 which I agree with. Him getting undressed by Hakeem in 95 did not help his cause. I felt like that team with Rodman should have rang. But they didn't thanks to lack of leadership.

[TDMVPDPOY]

if ur a loser like KG, ur only option is to pad ur stats to make it look like ur elite...do they translate to wins?...

[Dirks_Finale]

I used to love watching him make racial slurs to Dirk(you could easily read his lips) And Dirk took his azz to the cleaners time after time. Same thing with Duncan. He had no shot vs Tim and was outclassed. Yet he was still jawing when they were down 15 in the 4th vs SA :lol

I like KG but have a hard time seeing how people place him over Dirk, all things considered.


if ur a loser like KG, ur only option is to pad ur stats to make it look like ur elite...do they translate to wins?...

[Spurtacular]

:lol

Sucks when what you think you know comes shattering.
It's really hard for fan boys to accept.

[Dirks_Finale]

Sucks when what you think you know comes shattering.
It's really hard for fan boys to accept.

Not one word of what you said was true :lol

But you are entertaining. Thanks :lol

[Spurtacular]

Not one word of what you said was true :lol

But you are entertaining. Thanks :lol

You have a lot of decent enough takes.

But the Jordan propaganda is ingrained in you.

It'll take a long time for you to shake those shackles.

[Dirks_Finale]

Lets examine what you said:


Yea, I know there's a case that he's not top 25.
He couldn't shoot the three very well.
He may be the most over-rated defender of all-time besides Kobe.
There was about six fake fouls called for him every game.
He never won a championship that wasn't handed to him.


At of all that, didn't shoot the three very well is the only one you can legitmately argue in comparison to other superstars. And we are also talking about the same guy who broke a Finals record for 3 pointers vs Portland. So he could shoot the 3, but it really wasn't a thing then, so he didn't. The other stuff you mentioned are either subjective and/or the kind of stuff that you could say about any other superstar.



You have a lot of decent enough takes.

But the Jordan propaganda is ingrained in you.

It'll take a long time for you to shake those shackles.

[Spurtacular]

Lets examine what you said:



At of all that, didn't shoot the three very well is the only one you can legitmately argue in comparison to other superstars. And we are also talking about the same guy who broke a Finals record for 3 pointers vs Portland. So he could shoot the 3, but it really wasn't a thing then, so he didn't. The other stuff you mentioned are either subjective and/or the kind of stuff that you could say about any other superstar.

Blazers gave those threes open to Jordan because whenever they played defense they were racking up fouls. On most nights, it was a solid strategy. Spurs did the same thing with Lebron and the Heat in 2013. MJ had one night where they were going in is all. Even he shrugged like this doesn't normally happen. :lol

And MJ did try to get his game up to win 3-point contests and miserably failed on multiple attempts. I think he made 4 one year and 5 the next or something like that. :lol

Yea, I think MJ was a pretty good defender; but that doesn't make him over-rated when some people were saying he was the best, and he clearly wasn't.

Anyone who watched the Bulls in the 90's saw all the fake fouls. Were you even watching back then, or is that before your time? You really have no excuse to not know this.

[lefty]

The officiating in game 1 of the 1992 Finals was a travesty, Drexler wasn’t allowed to play defense on Jordan

A lot of BS phantom fouls, that’s why Jordan went off

[Dirks_Finale]

I was very much alive and well in the 90s.

Are you telling me Lebron and KD, today's stars , don't get all kinds of BS freebies, because you lose credibility if you are. Especially someone like Kobe who screamed HEEYY everytime someone played him close and got countless FT's as a result.

And then you have the spurs who have received preferential treatment from the refs for 20 years because they are scared of Popovich :lol

And I never felt like MJ was the best defender. Pippen was better, imo. But if he wanted to lock you down, consider yourself shut down for that night.


Blazers gave those threes open to Jordan because whenever they played defense they were racking up fouls. On most nights, it was a solid strategy. Spurs did the same thing with Lebron and the Heat in 2013. MJ had one night where they were going in is all. Even he shrugged like this doesn't normally happen. :lol

And MJ did try to get his game up to win 3-point contests and miserably failed on multiple attempts. I think he made 4 one year and 5 the next or something like that. :lol

Yea, I think MJ was a pretty good defender; but that doesn't make him over-rated when some people were saying he was the best, and he clearly wasn't.

Anyone who watched the Bulls in the 90's saw all the fake fouls. Were you even watching back then, or is that before your time? You really have no excuse to not know this.

[Dirks_Finale]

The officiating in game 1 of the 1992 Finals was a travesty, Drexler wasn’t allowed to play defense on Jordan

A lot of BS phantom fouls, that’s why Jordan went off

Blazers were on the road.

No different than the sort of treatment the spurs have received from the refs for the past 2 decades in their own building. You have to overcome it. Clyde was a choker.

[i'm_still_beta]

https://youtu.be/mmlfiMDUTQ4?t=364

It's easier to be the G.O.A.T when you have refs in your pocket (cheap fts increase ppg and fg%).

Also, never forget about 1993, when Rockets were robbed in game 7 vs Seattle. Stern wanted Barkley vs Jordan for ratings. He got it.

Chuck and Jordan were saved from Hakeem, the real MVP and best player of 1993.

[lefty]

Blazers were on the road.

No different than the sort of treatment the spurs have received from the refs for the past 2 decades in their own building. You have to overcome it. Clyde was a choker.

no it’s worse, Jordan was allowed to do whatever he wanted to do , that wasn’t home cooking, that blatant investment protection at play, Jordan got the sand treatment on the road

Clude wasnt a choker, name one teammate on that Portland tram who was on the level of Pippen

[lefty]

https://youtu.be/mmlfiMDUTQ4?t=364

It's easier to be the G.O.A.T when you have refs in your pocket (cheap fts increase ppg and fg%).

Also, never forget about 1993, when Rockets were robbed in game 7 vs Seattle. Stern wanted Barkley vs Jordan for ratings. He got it.

Chuck and Jordan were saved from Hakeem, the real MVP and best player of 1993.

Exactly
Stern knew Rockets would be a problem for Phoenix (and Chicago)

Also, during the WCF, NBC aired a promo of Jordan vs Barkley

[Dirks_Finale]

That roster was deep, though.

Jordan rings with that same roster. No doubt about it.



no it’s worse, Jordan was allowed to do whatever he wanted to do , that wasn’t home cooking, that blatant investment protection at play, Jordan got the sand treatment on the road

Clude wasnt a choker, name one teammate on that Portland tram who was on the level of Pippen

[i'm_still_beta]

If Houston drafted Drexler ...

Sabonis, Len Bias. Mike dodged so many bullets :lol.

Chicago also lucked with Scottie. IS MJ luckiest athlete of all time?

[Spurtacular]

The officiating in game 1 of the 1992 Finals was a travesty, Drexler wasn’t allowed to play defense on Jordan

A lot of BS phantom fouls, that’s why Jordan went off

I'm kind of remembering that without even having re-watched the game, all these years later.

[Spurtacular]

I was very much alive and well in the 90s.

Are you telling me Lebron and KD, today's stars , don't get all kinds of BS freebies, because you lose credibility if you are. Especially someone like Kobe who screamed HEEYY everytime someone played him close and got countless FT's as a result.

And then you have the spurs who have received preferential treatment from the refs for 20 years because they are scared of Popovich :lol

And I never felt like MJ was the best defender. Pippen was better, imo. But if he wanted to lock you down, consider yourself shut down for that night.

Did you see how low I ranked Kobe and KD on the list? Clearly, I'm factoring in the Jordan model to those who proceeded him.

And :lol that you think the Spurs got preferential treatment. You don't understand life whatsoever, let alone the NBA if you believe that.

[Spurtacular]

If Houston drafted Drexler ...

Sabonis, Len Bias. Mike dodged so many bullets :lol.

Chicago also lucked with Scottie. IS MJ luckiest athlete of all time?'

Easily. And I would bet it was league scouts and not Chicago scouts that told them they needed to draft Kukoc.

[i'm_still_beta]

92-93 season. Bulls vs Rockets. Damn, Hakeem :wow :worthy:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y-FbhBM9uvU

Stacey King, Bill Cartwright and Scott Williams vs Hakeem :lol. It would be fun to watch.

And even on off-shooting night (see second game that season), Hakeem still was the best player on the court thanks to all-time defense and rebounding.

[Spurtacular]

https://youtu.be/mmlfiMDUTQ4?t=364

It's easier to be the G.O.A.T when you have refs in your pocket (cheap fts increase ppg and fg%).

Also, never forget about 1993, when Rockets were robbed in game 7 vs Seattle. Stern wanted Barkley vs Jordan for ratings. He got it.

Chuck and Jordan were saved from Hakeem, the real MVP and best player of 1993.


Exactly
Stern knew Rockets would be a problem for Phoenix (and Chicago)

Also, during the WCF, NBC aired a promo of Jordan vs Barkley

NBA does it's homework / scouting and works with the refs to control outcomes.

I remember going to Kings @ Lakers back when C-Webb, Divac, Stoy, Bibby, Christie had come online.
It was a 30-point lead and a total beatdown. It was clear who the better team was.
I noticed that in subsequent match-ups the game was called way different. All kinds of ticky tack calls, stoppages, etc. to even it out.
To this day, I don't think Kobe/Shaq were on their level. I think people are so dumb when I hear all this sh** about imagine how many championships that Kobe and Shaq could've won.
No, they were being manufactured and they hit the limit cos Shaq was too fat and Kobe was too many he wasn't averaging 30 plus and getting his Jordan on in any event. They were done for.

[i'm_still_beta]

NBA does it's homework / scouting and works with the refs to control outcomes.

I remember going to Kings @ Lakers back when C-Webb, Divac, Stoy, Bibby, Christie had come online.
It was a 30-point lead and a total beatdown. It was clear who the better team was.
I noticed that in subsequent match-ups the game was called way different. All kinds of ticky tack calls, stoppages, etc. to even it out.
To this day, I don't think Kobe/Shaq were on their level. I think people are so dumb when I hear all this sh** about imagine how many championships that Kobe and Shaq could've won.
No, they were being manufactured and they hit the limit cos Shaq was too fat and Kobe was too many he wasn't averaging 30 plus and getting his Jordan on in any event. They were done for.

Truth nukes

Mike Bibby's face punching Kobe's elbow is 'all-time classic' example of shameless rigging.

[Dirks_Finale]

The Spurs have gotten preferential treatment for 2 decades. All the way up to the WCF. Then it ceases as the NBA knows they are a ratings killer.

Pop intimidates the refs the same way he intimidates sideline reporters.


Did you see how low I ranked Kobe and KD on the list? Clearly, I'm factoring in the Jordan model to those who proceeded him.

And :lol that you think the Spurs got preferential treatment. You don't understand life whatsoever, let alone the NBA if you believe that.

[Spurtacular]

Okay. I'll have to figure out where this guy may rank.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ywWToXf8L1E

[i'm_still_beta]

The Spurs have gotten preferential treatment for 2 decades. All the way up to the WCF. Then it ceases as the NBA knows they are a ratings killer.

Pop intimidates the refs the same way he intimidates sideline reporters.

BTW, how you rank Dirk all-time?

[Dirks_Finale]

Preview of the Chicago vs Houston Finals that never happened.

Series over :lol


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=44GsObtDHHk





92-93 season. Bulls vs Rockets. Damn, Hakeem :wow :worthy:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y-FbhBM9uvU

Stacey King, Bill Cartwright and Scott Williams vs Hakeem :lol. It would be fun to watch.

And even on off-shooting night (see second game that season), Hakeem still was the best player on the court thanks to all-time defense and rebounding.

[Dirks_Finale]

I think he is around 18 or 19.


BTW, how you rank Dirk all-time?

[Dirks_Finale]

Would be classified as a "plumber" by lefty :lol


Okay. I'll have to figure out where this guy may rank.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ywWToXf8L1E

[i'm_still_beta]

Preview of the Chicago vs Houston Finals that never happened.

Series over :lol


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=44GsObtDHHk

That's their only hope :lol. Reminds me Zaza vs Kawhi in 2017 WCF

[Spurtacular]

The Spurs have gotten preferential treatment for 2 decades. All the way up to the WCF. Then it ceases as the NBA knows they are a ratings killer.

Pop intimidates the refs the same way he intimidates sideline reporters.

That's a popular narrative that was put out there to confuse the actual cheating that does occur.

Pop is not that hard; and whatever pressure he exerts is basically to make them cheat less.

[Spurtacular]

Would be classified as a "plumber" by lefty :lol

Defensively, maybe.

[Spurtacular]

:lol Jordan wished he was Bird


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jsjukb2NttM

[KobesAchilles]

:lol Jordan wished he was Bird


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jsjukb2NttM
I always laugh at those who say Jordan would’ve learned to shoot the 3 in today’s game. Umm no he wouldn’t. Plenty of people can’t shoot the 3 in today’s game, I don’t see why Jordan would be any different. Westbrick, Wall, Wade, Giannis, Simmons, Demar. There are plenty of players that can’t shoot the 3 worth crap and this idea that Jordan wouldn’t be on this list of non-3 point shooters is ridiculous

[lefty]

I always laugh at those who say Jordan would’ve learned to shoot the 3 in today’s game. Umm no he wouldn’t. Plenty of people can’t shoot the 3 in today’s game, I don’t see why Jordan would be any different. Westbrick, Wall, Wade, Giannis, Simmons, Demar. There are plenty of players that can’t shoot the 3 worth crap and this idea that Jordan wouldn’t be on this list of non-3 point shooters is ridiculous
Exactly

[Dirks_Finale]

So guys who were not as dedicated as Jordan like JKidd and Ariza figured it out but Jordan would not :lol



I always laugh at those who say Jordan would’ve learned to shoot the 3 in today’s game. Umm no he wouldn’t. Plenty of people can’t shoot the 3 in today’s game, I don’t see why Jordan would be any different. Westbrick, Wall, Wade, Giannis, Simmons, Demar. There are plenty of players that can’t shoot the 3 worth crap and this idea that Jordan wouldn’t be on this list of non-3 point shooters is ridiculous

[i'm_still_beta]

So guys who were not as dedicated as Jordan like JKidd and Ariza figured it out but Jordan would not :lol

Talent and dedication are different things. Jordan couldn't defend bigs and rebound like Rodman. And they were almost the same size.

Theo Ratliff had 4,4 bpg in Portland. It's like saying: "So, guys who were not as dedicated as Jordan like him and Ben Wallace had it figured out but Jordan would not :lol. If Jordan wanted he could block 6 shots per game easily".

Point is, Jordan could be good 3-point shooter but it's far from guarantee. You can't just assume that he would be 40+ 3-point shooter. Brook Lopez has become great shooter. Demar Derozan not so much.

[Dirks_Finale]

More height or bulk is not required to develop a 3 point shot, though. :lol

I don't think he would be Steph Curry or anything, but 35-37% is feasible.


Talent and dedication are different things. Jordan couldn't defend bigs and rebound like Rodman. And they were almost the same size.

Theo Ratliff had 4,4 bpg in Portland. It's like saying: "So, guys who were not as dedicated as Jordan like him and Ben Wallace had it figured out but Jordan would not :lol. If Jordan wanted he could block 6 shots per game easily".

Point is, Jordan could be good 3-point shooter but it's far from guarantee. You can't just assume that he would be 40+ 3-point shooter. Brook Lopez has become great shooter. Demar Derozan not so much.

[KobesAchilles]

So guys who were not as dedicated as Jordan like JKidd and Ariza figured it out but Jordan would not :lol
Entirely different games. J-Kidd only learned to shoot past his prime when he didn’t have the ball as much. He wasn’t a sharpshooter at all in his (early) Dallas, Phoenix, and Net years. Then he moved more off ball and realized he had to become a shooter to survive league. Ariza never handled the ball at all. He never ran an offense, he never took more than 10 shots per game, he never had an offense go through him. So him learning to shoot was also by necessity.

Jordan on the other hand had the entire offense go through him. Jordan ran the plays, Jordan took the shots, made the passes. And while he didn’t bring the ball upcourt he immediately got the ball as soon as it was brought up for him. It’s easy to become a good 3 point shooter when you are a role player and that’s literally your job. It’s much harder to become one when you are The Man. It’s why Giannis is struggling. He has to defend the best players, be the best player on offense, create for his teammates, and now they’re asking him to bring the ball upcourt by himself more and and more. He has too much on his plate to just simply become a great 3 point shooter.

Jordan would have to entirely change his whole shot to shoot 3s. He would have to be able to come off screens and catch and shoot them or develop a step back 3 like Harden. Durant can do it bc he’s 6’10. Kyrie struggles with his 3 point shooting and he’s a great shooter. Stars don’t get that many wide open 3s. Lebron can pull up bc he’s 6’9 and doesn’t have to worry about getting blocked. Jordan is like 6’5. He can’t pull up over people for 3s. His shot mechanics are all wrong for step back 3s and he doesn’t have the handles of Kyrie or the know how if Steph to come off screens and launch them.

[Dirks_Finale]

Entirely different games. J-Kidd only learned to shoot past his prime when he didn’t have the ball as much. He wasn’t a sharpshooter at all in his (early) Dallas, Phoenix, and Net years. Then he moved more off ball and realized he had to become a shooter to survive league. Ariza never handled the ball at all. He never ran an offense, he never took more than 10 shots per game, he never had an offense go through him. So him learning to shoot was also by necessity.

Jordan on the other hand had the entire offense go through him. Jordan ran the plays, Jordan took the shots, made the passes. And while he didn’t bring the ball upcourt he immediately got the ball as soon as it was brought up for him. It’s easy to become a good 3 point shooter when you are a role player and that’s literally your job. It’s much harder to become one when you are The Man. It’s why Giannis is struggling. He has to defend the best players, be the best player on offense, create for his teammates, and now they’re asking him to bring the ball upcourt by himself more and and more. He has too much on his plate to just simply become a great 3 point shooter.

Jordan would have to entirely change his whole shot to shoot 3s. He would have to be able to come off screens and catch and shoot them or develop a step back 3 like Harden. Durant can do it bc he’s 6’10. Kyrie struggles with his 3 point shooting and he’s a great shooter. Stars don’t get that many wide open 3s. Lebron can pull up bc he’s 6’9 and doesn’t have to worry about getting blocked. Jordan is like 6’5. He can’t pull up over people for 3s. His shot mechanics are all wrong for step back 3s and he doesn’t have the handles of Kyrie or the know how if Steph to come off screens and launch them.

How many does Harden shoot? Like 12 per game or some insane number. I'm making no such claim for MJ.

I think its feasible for Jordan, who was incredibly athletic, had Kawhi sized hands, high bball iq and a drive that I have only seen Kobe come close to matching, to take 5 or 6 per game and hit at 35-37 % clip. It wouldn't involve reinventing himself especially in an era that does not allow hand checking. He went from being a slasher to being a turn around jump shot on the baseline guy. And that shot became like a layup thanks to repetition. You adjust as needed.

[Neo.]

How many does Harden shoot? Like 12 per game or some insane number. I'm making no such claim for MJ.

I think its feasible for Jordan, who was incredibly athletic, had Kawhi sized hands, high bball iq and a drive that I have only seen Kobe come close to matching, to take 5 or 6 per game and hit at 35-37 % clip. It wouldn't involve reinventing himself especially in an era that does not allow hand checking. He went from being a slasher to being a turn around jump shot on the baseline guy. And that shot became like a layup thanks to repetition. You adjust as needed.

so its feasible for mj and other players to adjust to modern rules/style if they played in the modern league, but not feasible for modern players to adjust to previous generation rules/style

:lmao at these continued double standards

[KobesAchilles]

How many does Harden shoot? Like 12 per game or some insane number. I'm making no such claim for MJ.

I think its feasible for Jordan, who was incredibly athletic, had Kawhi sized hands, high bball iq and a drive that I have only seen Kobe come close to matching, to take 5 or 6 per game and hit at 35-37 % clip. It wouldn't involve reinventing himself especially in an era that does not allow hand checking. He went from being a slasher to being a turn around jump shot on the baseline guy. And that shot became like a layup thanks to repetition. You adjust as needed.

But he doesn’t have Kawhi like size and that’s what matters. Harden is another example of a star who isn’t that big so he had to come up with a way to get 3s. He takes step backs bc those are the only 3s he can really generate. If Harden was in the Ariza role or the later Kidd days, he would be 40%+ in threes. But he’s the main creator and facilitator, offense runs through him, so he’s in the 30s. It’s not like the 3 was invented before Jordan played. It was there his entire pro career. Even if you say that teams use it differently (which duh) there was no excuse for Jordan not to be in the upper 30% when he was playing other than he wasn’t good enough. He had teammates who hit 40%. Larry Bird shot in the 40% and he was before the 3. Jordan just wasn’t a great 3 point shooter.

He had 15 years to become one and he never did. It’s ok. He has flaws. But for people to just scoff like well if he played today’s game he would have a 3. Would he? What really would make his game different than Westbrook? A super athletic guard with a lightning first step who has midrange but no 3.

[Spurtacular]

6. John Stockton :lol

All-time stls leader. All-time asts leader.

Dude was a baller when he was like 41. Very few players stay elite into their 40's


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ecX_0zjF04A

[Dirks_Finale]

Agreed...but look at your ranking though :lol


All-time stls leader. All-time asts leader.

Dude was a baller when he was like 41. Very few players stay elite into their 40's


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ecX_0zjF04A

[Dirks_Finale]

Point out the post I made stating that Lebron would be some insignificant role player in that era.


so its feasible for mj and other players to adjust to modern rules/style if they played in the modern league, but not feasible for modern players to adjust to previous generation rules/style

:lmao at these continued double standards

[Dirks_Finale]

Basketball is a rhythm sport. Jordan rarely took enough 3's to get in rhythm. And when he did:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rs4PpwyrVmo


But he doesn’t have Kawhi like size and that’s what matters. Harden is another example of a star who isn’t that big so he had to come up with a way to get 3s. He takes step backs bc those are the only 3s he can really generate. If Harden was in the Ariza role or the later Kidd days, he would be 40%+ in threes. But he’s the main creator and facilitator, offense runs through him, so he’s in the 30s. It’s not like the 3 was invented before Jordan played. It was there his entire pro career. Even if you say that teams use it differently (which duh) there was no excuse for Jordan not to be in the upper 30% when he was playing other than he wasn’t good enough. He had teammates who hit 40%. Larry Bird shot in the 40% and he was before the 3. Jordan just wasn’t a great 3 point shooter.

He had 15 years to become one and he never did. It’s ok. He has flaws. But for people to just scoff like well if he played today’s game he would have a 3. Would he? What really would make his game different than Westbrook? A super athletic guard with a lightning first step who has midrange but no 3.

[KobesAchilles]

Basketball is a rhythm sport. Jordan rarely took enough 3's to get in rhythm. And when he did:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rs4PpwyrVmo
So one game? Can you show any other game of his where he did this? Get that weak shit out of here :lol
Yeah Michael Jordan never had the opportunity to get himself in rhythm ever again. The dude just got no shots up.
Lol how do I fall for this troll job. Nice one :lol

[Dirks_Finale]

We both know the three just wasn't much of a thing back then.

Not claiming he would be Bird or Curry. But he'd be better than you think.


So one game? Can you show any other game of his where he did this? Get that weak shit out of here :lol
Yeah Michael Jordan never had the opportunity to get himself in rhythm ever again. The dude just got no shots up.
Lol how do I fall for this troll job. Nice one :lol

[Spurtacular]

Agreed...but look at your ranking though :lol

All-time in two of five major categories. Yea, he should maybe be higher.

[Spurtacular]

Basketball is a rhythm sport. Jordan rarely took enough 3's to get in rhythm. And when he did:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rs4PpwyrVmo

Those threes are darts (and largely open). His footing is not very good.
You can tell he's not all that comfortable shooting from that range.
He's probably a tick below Kobe when it comes to three shooting.
Yea, maybe he could've been 32 3FG volume shooter or something; serviceable. That's all.
His stroke even on a good night is just not up there with the Ray Allens or Klay Thompsons of the world.

[Neo.]

Point out the post I made stating that Lebron would be some insignificant role player in that era.

1 i never claimed you said this at all

2 why do you bring up lebron again when i said absolutely nothing about lebron :lmao obsessed

3 there are plenty of posts of you saying various modern players wouldnt be able to handle the style of previous eras which is where the double standard comes in. im not going to waste time pulling up a post when you know you said it

[Dirks_Finale]

Kobe is a solid comparison. Similar games. He shot like 33% for his career. And Jordan was generally a more efficient player than Kobe, so.....


Those threes are darts (and largely open). His footing is not very good.
You can tell he's not all that comfortable shooting from that range.
He's probably a tick below Kobe when it comes to three shooting.
Yea, maybe he could've been 32 3FG volume shooter or something; serviceable. That's all.
His stroke even on a good night is just not up there with the Ray Allens or Klay Thompsons of the world.

[Dirks_Finale]

99.9999999% of your replies to me are you swooping in to the aid of Lebron...or you agreeing with lefty who is elevating Lebron :lol

We all know who you had in mind with the double standard comment


1 i never claimed you said this at all

2 why do you bring up lebron again when i said absolutely nothing about lebron :lmao obsessed

3 there are plenty of posts of you saying various modern players wouldnt be able to handle the style of previous eras which is where the double standard comes in. im not going to waste time pulling up a post when you know you said it

[Spurtacular]

Kobe is a solid comparison. Similar games. He shot like 33% for his career. And Jordan was generally a more efficient player than Kobe, so.....

Both had terrible strokes from outside. Kobe's probably a tinge prettier. Again, Michael's feet, bending the knees inward; just not conducive to range shooting.

[Neo.]

99.9999999% of your replies to me are you swooping in to the aid of Lebron...or you agreeing with lefty who is elevating Lebron :lol

We all know who you had in mind with the double standard comment

i dont deny being a lebron fan. but if you actually took the time to read anything, you would see that you were the one who brought up lebron the majority of the time, not me. my issue through basically all of our discussions have been with 1) double standards and 2) revisionist history of previous eras. lebron was usually the focus of the discussion due to your obsession with bringing him up. but i have defended plenty of other modern stars too on these subjects, such as steph, kd, kobe, harden, dirk, etc...

fwiw i grew up watching 90s basketball so it has a very special place in my heart. but im not going to be ignorant and exalt it as being something it wasnt. it was an era of basketball that generally lacked talent (compared to the 80s, 00s, and 10s), but overcame it with energy, effort and the showmanship of MJ.

whats also funny is your attempt to try to avoid addressing your ridiculous double standard. now im curious how you plan to justify it.

"mike is the goat, so he should get a pass!!!1!11!" is basically what it boils down to for people who use that ridiculous double standard

[Dirks_Finale]

Not a double standard to simply post facts

Yes, expansion diluted the talent pool in the 90's.

And yes, some players today are overly sensitive, skinny jean wearing, metrosexual, instagram models who would wither up and die in 90's NBA :lol


i dont deny being a lebron fan. but if you actually took the time to read anything, you would see that you were the one who brought up lebron the majority of the time, not me. my issue through basically all of our discussions have been with 1) double standards and 2) revisionist history of previous eras. lebron was usually the focus of the discussion due to your obsession with bringing him up. but i have defended plenty of other modern stars too on these subjects, such as steph, kd, kobe, harden, dirk, etc...

fwiw i grew up watching 90s basketball so it has a very special place in my heart. but im not going to be ignorant and exalt it as being something it wasnt. it was an era of basketball that generally lacked talent (compared to the 80s, 00s, and 10s), but overcame it with energy, effort and the showmanship of MJ.

whats also funny is your attempt to try to avoid addressing your ridiculous double standard. now im curious how you plan to justify it.

"mike is the goat, so he should get a pass!!!1!11!" is basically what it boils down to for people who use that ridiculous double standard

[Neo.]

Not a double standard to simply post facts

so where is the fact that mj would be a 35-37% career 3pt shooter in the modern nba?


And yes, some players today are overly sensitive, skinny jean wearing, metrosexual, instagram models who would wither up and die in 90's NBA :lol

but if they grew up in the 70s and 80s, to play in the 90s, whos to say they would be overly sensitive, skinny jean wearing, metrosexual instagram models? just like whos to say mj would be a good 3pt shooter if he grew up later and played in the modern league? or that he wouldn't also be one of those same guys?

double standards.

[KobesAchilles]

We both know the three just wasn't much of a thing back then.

Not claiming he would be Bird or Curry. But he'd be better than you think.
I know the 3 ball is waaaay more prevalent today but he still played in an era with the 3 point shot. He had 17 years to become a decent 3 point shooter and he never was one. I don’t think you realize how hard it is to be the man AND have a 3 point shot. There aren’t ANY shooting guards that I know of that were able to be the focal point on offense, create for others, and shoot the 3 ball at a good clip that you say besides James Harden. Lebron is 6’9. He has a size advantage over everyone which helps his 3 point % bc he can just pull up and shoot. Same with Durant. But smaller players hav to run around screens, do pic n roll 3s, or step backs. They aren’t set most of the time when they’re shooting.

I believe if Michael Jordan was in an Ariza role than of course he could be a good 3 point shooter. But in the role he played his entire career, I don’t see it happening. Even Kobe shot like 33% for his career. It’s hard man. Damn near impossible. There’s a difference in Michael being a good 3 point shooter and Michael doing all the things he was doing on top of being a good 3 point shooter. Hell Kyrie Irving won a 3 point contest, is an all world shooter and dribbler, yet he shoots like 37% from 3.