Manu
Dirk
You're starting to sound like Pelosi. Your opinion is your opinion and when people disagree it means that there is room for you to be wrong. Dirk is backed by stats and conjecture, Manu is backed by real success.
In the words of Jack, "You can't handle the truth."
You may now kiss the ring(s).
He took a team with Jason Terry and Josh Howard as his backup to the Finals. Manu can't do that.
Yep, that's why Popovich would never let players like Michael Finley and Matt Bonner see the floor, and why he would pinch his nose and make a "What's that smell?" face if you ever suggested Dirk on the Spurs to him.And ya a no defense playing hack is really Spur-like
This is too easy.
No, it's not an opinion to say Dirk is better than Manu, or the Spurs would easily duplicate that success if they swapped out.
Along with anybody who has ever seen the two play and been forced to make a judgment about which player is better.Dirk is backed by stats and conjecture,
Robert Horry was a better player in his prime than Dirk Nowitzki.You may now kiss the ring(s)
Some Mav fans are just living in the woodwork of this thread. Anybody got a can of Raid.
Seems like there are 88 Manu fans on this forum.
"Mommy Moderator! Make them stop!"
Stop whining and back up your arguments with facts and logic. Don't complain like some whiny pussy crybaby .
This is still going?
I never said you did...I was inferring that this was the normal M.O. for homers. BTW, I don't live in DFW.
Mav fans generally have to throw like: "go back to your third world hole country" when they're unsuccessfully trying to get in my head...
As you live in DFW... you should go get a Terry jersey... he is a a great ball player and you are a basketball fan first...
I just love how certain subjects bring out the bag in some normally good posters.
Maybe Kori or timvp need to lock it so butthurt Manu fan doesn't own himself any further.
Holy Manu has 89 votes, damn I wish this was public.
So swapping Manu out for Dirk would have been a surefire 5+ rings now eh?
So a lot of you guys here have an "A" in classic crystall ball theory and its consequences.
Adding Karl Malone and Gary Payton to Kobe and Shaq is also of course a surefire le right?...right?...am I right?
You don't think the Spurs win 3 rings with Dallas eliminated as a threat?
Well, those guys were role players at the twilight of their careers, whereas Dirk was in the prime of his career from 2003 to 2007. Good analogyAdding Karl Malone and Gary Payton to Kobe and Shaq is also of course a surefire le right?...right?...am I right?
If Malone was healthy they very well could have won the finals.
Dirk is obviously a better player. But just to put in, being a better player does not necessarily mean the team will be better for it. This is a "what if" debate of little consequence, simply because it could go either way. Who ing cares as well? Except some ing homers coming out of the wood work with a decent chance at winning a debate based off an idiotic idea.
As a fiercely loyal Spurs fan (they are my favorite team in all of sports after all), I have to point out that this argument is full of fail. The problem with this argument, besides the obvious that Payton and Malone were past their primes is that fact that they had nothing to do with the Lakers failing to win the le.
The Lakers lost because of Shaq and Kobe's inability to coexist any longer (check the stats- Kobe 22 ppg 31% shooting, Shaq 26 ppg 63% shooting), not with any chemistry problems caused by Payton and Malone.
Dirk and Duncan both have personalities that lend themselves to working with each other.
What Manu fans are failing to understand is that you can be a loyal sports fan without losing objectivity. I'm a Spurs fan. But anyone but a BLIND homer can see that Dirk is a better player than Gino in this argument. Dirk provides matchup nightmares, which in turn help Duncan exploit any matchup he has, and vice versa. There is no common sense argument to state that the two couldn't excel togethter. NOT ONE. PERIOD.
Ask any GM in the league who'd they choose and the consensus would be Dirk. If Pop and RC could make the trade they would. Only blind homers fail to see that.
Admitting that Dirk would make the Spurs more successful than Gino doesn't make you love Gino any less. It just means you can see the forest for the trees.
lol at the results of the poll so far
Manu 49.18 %
Dirk 50.82 %
Once again...logic wins in straight sets.
[quote=Nathan Explosion;3626720]As a fiercely loyal Spurs fan (they are my favorite team in all of sports after all), I have to point out that this argument is full of fail. The problem with this argument, besides the obvious that Payton and Malone were past their primes is that fact that they had nothing to do with the Lakers failing to win the le. [\quote]
Thank you for the bold part. For all the ppl here who are bashing homers and stressing "logic", the above part is the about the only logic. There is no way anyone can know for sure. We got only conjectures from ppl, seen from their perspectives.
Manu hasn't been cast as leader of a NBA team and told to perform and be their savior. We don't know if he could have(all my statements are qualified as regarding a prime Manu or Dirk). Make no mistake, Manu has learned to play the secondary role and only step up when needed.
Again, for the "logic" folks, I just can't admit the above. I have no idea how much of a great player Dirk would be playing second banana to Duncan. I guess we all agree, on Timmy's team, Dirk will officially be second banana. So can he be as successful as Manu and provide the team anything that the team needs, clutch baskets, assists, steals, fouls(lets include the bad as well), energy, and just basically "championship moment" plays with the same or better efficiency as Manu? If you answer of course, I will have to refer you back to my sarcastic comment about Malone-Payton etc.Admitting that Dirk would make the Spurs more successful than Gino doesn't make you love Gino any less. It just means you can see the forest for the trees.
The Spurs might have won more with a few things going differently. I think, even without a crystall ball degree, the same sentence will apply if it was Dirk on the team. We could have always won more if coupla things had gone differently. Who might have been better for Spurs? WHo the knows!
Manu is awesome, Dirk is great. Thats me, a Spurs "blinded" stumbling homer who is not even argentinean.
That makes no sense ^^^^^
This is called making an informed/educated decision or guess. Is it an exact science? No. But by your logic, no one can argue anything unless it has happened already or else they have a "crystal ball degree"?
That is the point of this forum to a certain degree. To discuss theory and probabilities. To make an argument that "no one knows the future, so there can be no conclusion" is a silly thing to do and defeats the purpose.
Why discuss this up coming season at all or say that Richard Jefferson was a good move for the Spurs if it is all just guessing into the future anyways?
[quote=LionZion;3626801]If Kobe can play second banana to a prime Shaq, then Dirk can play second banana to Duncan quite easily.
Really people you can't do much better than 3 championships in 6 years. You know how difficult it is to win a championship? you need everysingle thing to go your way, one thing that doesn't go your way and that's it you go home.
If you have data on how a prime Manu plays as a team leader on a decent team, or how good a prime Dirk is as second banana on a playoff contender, please do tell. For the rest, its pure conjecture. We can make informed decisions, when there is information. Otherwise, its called a leap of faith. Which is what our up coming season is btw.
he would have less than 89 votes if it was public
So, in an extreme case, it is reasonable to say that putting in Dwayne Wade instead of Brent Barry could not have improved the Spurs, because it's pure conjecture?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote