Manu
Dirk
Could it be that Manu's ability to make teammates better have anything to do with having 'stacked' teams? If my memories serves me correct, dirk has been part of some 'stacked' teams as well and has yet to win anything worth regarding.
He wanted an undisputable landslide, not a < 10% margin. Because to him his point is undisputable. He wanted to call out another poster and it fired back. So he resorts to the usual butthurt losers do: If you don't agree with me you are stupid.
Anybody with half a brain knows that the entire proposition is entirely subjective, completely open to interpretation, and impossible to verify. He thought the 'mob' would support him and validate his point. He failed miserably at that.
Last edited by ElNono; 08-10-2009 at 12:23 AM.
I don't agree, but it's besides the proposition of the OP.
We are being asked who would make a better second banana to TD, Manu in his prime or Dirk in his prime. The answer is entirely subjective and has absolutely nothing to do with his teammates. I mean, under this proposition their teammates would be the same.
Which is why this argumentative see-saw is an exercise in futility...
Strictly by the constraints given in the opening thread...
Manu in his prime (2005 playoff version), was more dominant, versatile, efficient and productive, than any version of Dirk at his prime. Manu orchestrated key playoff victories and actually WON... the name of the game is to win... and that's what Manu does; WIN*....
*Disclaimer (when not hurt)... then again, being hurt negates the argument that one is in their prime...
Last edited by Phenomanul; 08-10-2009 at 12:32 AM.
Dirk.
Okay, let's flip the coin (if it hasn't already been done)
Put 2005 Manu on the Mavs from 2002 - 2009 and, although I would like it to be otherwise, he wouldn't have as much success as Dirk has (as far as non-nba championship winning teams go...'cos a Manu-led Mavs would be just as ringless)
You know why? 'Cos there are plenty of 2 guards/swingmen who can either compete/better Manu (Kobe, Wade, Lebron, early 2000's T-Mac) or keep up at a reasonable level (SJax et al.)
There aren't even a handful of 7 footers who are mobile enough to guard Dirk on the perimeter. And as has been the case for many seasons, it's very hard to find a swingman who is able to stop Dirk either.
Now...put that Dirk in the same role that 2002-2009 Manu had on the Spurs?
I still don't get how we have 16 pages of heated debate going on here.
Dirk, no contest. He is simply more talented and has a freakish combination of size and shooting ability. There are so few players that can guard him even decently. He is also in much better health.
The whole argument is pretty dumb though as Dirk and Manu make nowhere near the same salary which makes the whole thing moot.
No. I think he would like a legit #2 option. But he knows he's the man in Dallas and he. Would he accept being 2nd fiddle? Yes, if one of the 4 or 5 players that are better than him would be on his team he would do so b/c he is a winner and wants to win.
But you don't work as hard as he does and thrive for as long as he has and want to be #2. He's a legit #1 and wants to be.
Ahh...the final straw in the hay field. The "it's subject to interpretation and it can't be verified" argument. I love this argument because it can be used at any time when debating a hypothetical situation and it usually signals an admission of defeat. You say that anyone with half a brain can see this, but from where I am standing it looks like the people on this site with a brain argued for Dirk.
And I am far from butthurt...It's more marveling at homerism and hate, which many besides me have done. It was an underestimation on my part and I admit that. I didn't realize that the CoM had such a large "mob" of wacky fundamentalists among them. But as I said before, if you want to be a blind homer then go right ahead. Laker fan does it all the time and gets away with it.
Seeing that Dirk is winning this poll but not by much, shows just how homer some of the Spurs fans are.
How do you know for sure??? No one, ABSOLUTELY NO ONE! could stop that version of Manu...
He got to the rim at will...
Was highly efficient... scoring 30+ points on less than 12 shots...
Averaging 5+ assists...
Getting every crucial rebound...
And when he didn't score, the opposing team tried to whack him on his noggin', no matter... Ginobili got to the line and calmly sank his free-throws...
He was a playmaker who commanded double teams and made the opposing strategy pay.
It's not a coincidence R.C. Buford recently called Ginobili a "Championship moment player".... that's pretty high praise for a guy who's supposedly coattailing his way to championships...
You can't claim your proposition is hypothetical then dismiss opinion that is "subject to interpretation and can't be verified" as invalid.
Mere logic doesn't work that way. Or you're just plain dumb, which would go a long ways towards explaining how this thread came to be in the first place.
Or your Dirk bias detector is quite skewed.
You came here thinking this poll was a home run, and when it blows in your face you tag your failure to the CoM, homers, haters, etc. Talk about strawmans and loser arguments.
Should you had made a somewhat similar proposition asking who is better between Duncan and Manu, which is a completely clear cut proposition, unlike this one, there would be no CoM, homers or haters to blame.
But you didn't make this thread because you had any doubts, you made this thread because you wanted to call somebody out and it blew right in your face. Now deal with it.
lol this thing is still up here.
OK this will be the last thing I'd say about this subject. I'll honestly take Manu at his prime over Dirk at his prime but I can definitely understand why others would take Nowitzki over Ginobili, the "Manu can't even be compared to Dirk" comments are what bothers me, if you think that Manu can't be compared with Dirk then you're either underrating Gino or overrating Nowitzki.
Dirk isn't Tim Duncan or Shaq and Manu isn't a role player, the fact that most of you have only seen Manu on that role is what I think makes you bealive that. But like I said before: Ginobili could easily be the leader of a pretty decent team on the NBA. I'm pretty sure that the ones that think that Manu isn't on the same level with Dirk also think that Joe Johnson is a better basketball player than Ginobili.
Only when along with someone equally as great as Jordan can Dirk be considered a second banana, and we all know how countable such players are in NBA history. While it would occupy hundreds of pages to list the names alongside whom Manu can be an assistant.
The poll is in the spurs section. If you make the same thread in the nba section or any other nba forums, Dirk will win easily.
Probably. But it only goes to show how naive/dumb the OP is. You post this fail thread and then act 'surprised' there are Spurs homers here?
I mean, really?
Okay last post for me too (only my 3rd but I'm already tired of this).
Yes, Manu was awesome in those playoffs. He hit shots, made clutch plays on both sides, imposed his will, whatever.
But who won the Finals MVP? Tim Duncan. And no matter how much Manu-lovers whined about it, at the end of the day, who is the reason for an overwhelming number of opportunities for anyone on the Spurs (including Manu and Tony)? Tim Duncan.
We are indeed talking about the "Second Banana" here, right? The guy who plays off of and supports the "First Banana."
I think what most of the people who agree with me are saying is that, seeing as how a player like Manu thrived in this "Second Banana" role to Duncan, why wouldn't Dirk be just as good, if not better, in a role that he has never been fortunate enough to have in his career? ('Cos he was busy being relatively highly successful being the First Option.)
All I'm saying is that from my point of view, it is pretty clear-cut that if Prime Dirk had/has an opportunity to play in that role on the Spurs, he'd make a bigger impact than Manu (but not by some blizzard avalanche landslide either). That's it. Nothing more, nothing less.
(And how the do you know anything for sure? Why even have discussions about anything that didn't "actually take place" and is "proven" and "real" if we can't know anything "for sure"? Why the did we invent the lightbulb? Candles and torches were pretty damn good for years and years. They're a SURE, PROVEN thing. Why bother with lightbulbs? They're UNKNOWN... ... ...can't possibly be better than a SURE thing.)
Last edited by mikekim; 08-10-2009 at 10:59 AM.
It is invalid because it is a cop out. The point of the thread is to take both players game's and plug them in to Duncan's game and see which one would yield the best results. Saying stuff like, "Manu has had good results and we don't know what would happen with Dirk" is foolishness. I am not going to waste keystrokes repeating the arguments for Dirk again because it has been done repeatedly throughout this thread and every single time he is obviously superior compared to Manu when paired with Duncan.
lol...this statement. I am biased towards Dirk?Or your Dirk bias detector is quite skewed.
Your right...I do contribute it's failure to homers, hater, CoM, etc. Again, I underestimated the critical thinking ability of Manu fan/Spur fan. I never intended to embarrass my fellow fans, but it happened and I feel bad for it. I will be sure to scrap that idea I had for the "Second Banana: Jordan vs. Manu" thread I was planning on starting. I'd hate to cause anymore unnecessary damage.You came here thinking this poll was a home run, and when it blows in your face you tag your failure to the CoM, homers, haters, etc. Talk about strawmans and loser arguments.
Should you had made a somewhat similar proposition asking who is better between Duncan and Manu, which is a completely clear cut proposition, unlike this one, there would be no CoM, homers or haters to blame.
But you didn't make this thread because you had any doubts, you made this thread because you wanted to call somebody out and it blew right in your face. Now deal with it.
Iverson can't get a job because he thinks it's still 2001 and he wants the $$ and the PT to reflect that.
Those guys were role players at the end of their careers. Dirk is a franchise player. You guys just keep failing at this.In the end the Lakers with Malone and Payton has taught us that you can't just slap great players together to make a great team.
Sadly...this thread is full of win for Mavs fan.
Nothing new when it comes to all things Mavs/Spurs.Sadly...this thread is full of win for Mavs fan.
Nothing new when it comes to all things Mavs/Spurs.......
I will say this. Although Dirk is the better player, that does not always mean he would win in every scenario. That is just too myopic. Intangibles, defense and other things can make someone a better fit.
For example, Vince Carter is a better player than Manu, but I would not take him over Manu in this situation. I would take Dirk in this scenario, but it is not just because he is a better player overall. This is a "second option" poll, not a "who is the better player poll".
I accidently voted for Manu.
I think Dirk and Timmy would be awesome together. Dirk gets an even bigger edge for actually being healthy. Who knows what we'll get from Manu this year.
Exactly. Some people are under the allusion that this is a straight up Dirk vs. Manu poll...and that is simply not the case. If you take that angle it is much closer. But if one weighs the benefits of playing next to Duncan, then it becomes decidedly favorable towards Dirk.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
