I will agree that many times Dirk is too passive, which I guess could be "soft" and that sometimes physicality gets to him.
BUT
Dirk will never be a great post player, it's not his game, he has worked on it and gotten significantly better, but few players are dominant at everything. So you either build the right team around him or let him be Robin at this point in his career. Neither of which has been done.
Yet he made every possible play at the end of Game 5 to win it, while DWhistle was hitting FTs on the other end. You can't ask anymore out of your superstar.
And that fadeway, which was a thing of beauty, was THE best option. How many people can go straight at Shaq in 2006 and score????? Duncan maybe, and that's it. We don't have Duncan, that's too bad, we have Dirk who has proven that with a good cast can take you far.
If you mean the Finals you are completely off base.
No, I mean the Hornets series.
Dirk was great in the Hornet series.
I don't think Dirk is soft. Then again, he kills the Spurs so my view is a bit skewed.
But really, say he got to play as Shaq's sidekick back when Shaq was in his prime. Dirk wouldn't have anyone calling him soft because defenses wouldn't be able to focus on him and he'd be free to play the assassin role.
The only thing I'd call soft about Dirk's current game is that he for some reason shoots jumpers even if he has a point guard switched off onto him. Outside of that, Dirk taking a midrange jumpers is usually a good shot. I can't really blame the best jumpshooting 7-footer in NBA history taking jumpshots.
He's got such a high-release point on his jumper that very few guys can alter his shot. A 7-footer with such a pure shot is a nightmare matchup for most teams that don't have a long 3.
Finley is our long three!
A layup is still a higher percentage shot than a 17 footer. Sorry, but I might actually have to use some SpursDynasty "wisdom" because anybody can get on a streak and hit some jumpers, but it takes a special kind of player to relentlessly attack the basket. And Dirk just doesn't consistently have that in him. As big a matchup nightmare as Dirk creates, that storm can still be weathered by most teams, mainly due to the fact that Dirk can't consistently get himself easy buckets, he's gotta work for every point he gets.
Right now, Dirk >>> Deron.Every ing team will rather have Deron than Dirk. Even though Dirk is a good and sometimes a great player, i would rather have Deron on my team.
BTW for some reason Deron always owns CP3, and almost single handedly beat the Lakers the last post season. If Boozer hadn't chocked, they may well have beaten them.
So when you say Dirk owns the Jazz, thisis all i can think of.
But if your starting a franchise then year, the age difference makes Deron the obvious choice.
Every single GM would probably take Chris Bosh over Tim Duncan too.
Dirk is a superstar. If he wouldnt be a white blondish euro noone would call him soft.
Whoever watched him playing on German NT knows is a true warrior. And in the NBA he pulled a team of bags to the finals and rightly won a regular season MVP.
Maybe Cuban, Terry and a bunch of others are idiots but Dirk is a great guy.
I beg to differ, Deron is one of the premier point guards in the NBA (at worst the second best).
Deron alone gave the Lakers all they could handle in the WCSF last year.
Now that's why you're not a GM.
Fixed.
My comment wasn't intended to be funny. Why would I want to see us giving up a STUD for the 2nd biggest pussy in the league when we're still dealing with the 1st biggest pussy in the league?
No thanks. I'll keep Millsap and his younger age, better future, and cheaper contract over that German .
He consistently plays well against us, but kill us? I mean, it took more than just Dirk's play to take us down in 2006, and before and after that I think we've done pretty well against Dallas (not coincidentally, when the players around him started to decline, we started to beat them more often).
I agree he would be a great second fiddle to a true superstar. That said, he was put as the centerpiece on a team, and he obviously doesn't have what it takes to carry a team all the way. My Gasol comment comes to mind.
But it's not like he's bad when he puts the ball on the floor and attacks the basket. He more often than not either gets the bucket or an and 1. And both you and I know that breaking down defenses like that makes a lot more happen than taking a jumpshot, no matter how good a percent jumpshooter you are.
i disagree.
Dirk proved in 2006 he can carry a team all the way, he had good stats in the finals but the combination of other mavs choking and really bad officiating would be too much to overcome for any superstar in the league.
do you really think mavs didn't deserve to win in 2006?
great to see so many reasonable spurs fans!
I have said it before and say it again, if Dirk was ever traded I want to see him play next to Duncan.
I think it's a disservice to other players in that team to pin in all on Dirk, even more so now that we have hindsight. JHo was playing All-Star level basketball back then, and as much as Mavs fans want to dog on Devin Harris, he single handedly broke down our defense with his penetration more times than Tony did to theirs. And as much as I hate to say it, Stackhouse was a stud coming off the bench. Above all, they played excellent defense, something you have to put entirely on Avery's shoulders.
I think that team deserved to be in the Finals. I think the best team always wins.
+1
Tim Duncan had two All Stars by his side. KG had Ray Allen and Paul Pierce. Between Jason Terry and Josh Howard, Dirk had one All Star injury replacement selection by his side.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
