The Second Banana: Dirk vs. Manu

[ElNono]

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

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

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

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

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

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

[Blackjack]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

I don't think Duncan is that guy.

[leo_d]

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

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

[dirk4mvp]

Manu in his prime was a top ten player

[leo_d]

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

[dirk4mvp]

top 10 player

[leo_d]

[DAF86]

top 10 player

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

[dirk4mvp]

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

[DPG21920]

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

[Findog]

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

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

[leo_d]

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

The Spurs only needed him to sustained for 16

[DPG21920]

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

[leo_d]

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

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

[DAF86]

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

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

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

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

[benefactor]

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

[CoMhomervoice]
Liar! Manu is better than Kobe all the time!
[/CoMhomervoice]

[DPG21920]

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

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

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

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

[DAF86]

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

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

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

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

[DPG21920]

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

[DPG21920]

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

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

[sonic21]

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

[weebo]

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

[DPG21920]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

I don't think Duncan is that guy.

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

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

[weebo]

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

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

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

[DAF86]

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

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

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

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