Reply With Quote
tbh mogrovejo can post as many long-winded comments as he want, he outed himself as an idiot when he said it was okay for Hollinger to pick and choose when he wanted to be a formula Nazi and when he wanted to go with his gut.
Sprewell shot 40FG% for that season + 33% from 3 + couldn't play defense any more. Szerbiak was injured almost the entire season and was garbage when he came back. I remember thinking that Garnett was the only superstar with a supporting cast as bad or worse as Pierce's, but I didn't recall it was this bad. Most of those guys were out of the NBA 2 seasons later. Hoiberg in his last season and a 36 yrs old Ervin Johnson as starters, Madsen and the Kandi man as key rotational players. Trenton Hassel as the 2nd best player. Yikes. Are you honestly comparing this to the Mavs team in 2006?
tbh mogrovejo can post as many long-winded comments as he want, he outed himself as an idiot when he said it was okay for Hollinger to pick and choose when he wanted to be a formula Nazi and when he wanted to go with his gut.
Dirk's career stats: 22.9 pts, 8,5 rbds, 2,7 assts, on 473%
Dirk - 23, 9 and 3 for his career on .509% eFG.
KG - 20, 11 and 4 for his career on .502% eFG.
Since when 8,5 = 9?
Dirk (a 7 foot all-star PF) only averaged double digits on rbds one season (10.0 rbds in '02) in 12 years on the NBA.
Also 3 against 4 may not seem like much (although it is, specially for career stats) but 2,7 against 4,2 does look like a considerable margin.
lol drawing numbers.
lol manu > Dirk
That's not what I said but anyway we all know you always go by the W/L record when making predictions or you never care about a team W/L record when making predictions.
Btw, what's the Mavs record since that Hollinger article?
Dirk's clutchness >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Garnett's
and that's saying something because I think Dirk has choked plenty.
Manu in a different team - not playing 30 mpg off the bench, not under Duncan's shadow, as the primary scorer and playmaker - would put up numbers like 24/6/5 with very good defense, shot-creation and efficient overall play and be seen by the casual fan at a different light. Very underrated.
Not since Marlon Brando's colonic has someone pulled so much out of their ass.
What's more useful in terms of helping your team? Setting up near the baseline and hitting cutters, which depends on good teammates who can finish in traffic, or being able to create your shot without having to have multiple screens set for you? Yeah, KG is a better passer, but it doesn't add to the case of him being a better player. It just means he has a more versatile skillset. You're on more solid footing by sticking to the argument that his defense is more important that Dirk's offense.
Where did I say scoring is more important than everything else? I freely admit KG had a better all-around game than Dirk. I said in an earlier post that defense is more important in offense.Again, people who think that scoring > everything else just belong to a peculiar age of the history of basketball.
Hey Morey, what is "smaller FG?" I know what eFG% is and Dirk's is better than KG for his career. Their roles on offense are also different - KG either looks for cutters or takes an iffy 12-foot turnaround jumper. Dirk sets up at the foul line or elbow and either takes a jumper that is money in the bank or hits cutters from the baseline.This forum, populated with lots of people who still commit that mistake, is probably one of the last examples of those times. To Dirk's advantage in scoring one can call marginal - a little more points due to higher usage rate, smaller FG%.
If we're looking at advanced stats, KG's prime was 2003-2005, Dirk's was 2005-2007. KG's best PERs were 29.4 and 28.2, Dirk's 28.1 and 27.6 Win Shares - KG 18.3 and 16.1, Dirk 17.7 and 16.3. If Dirk is nothing more than a white German McAdoo (all scoring, no D), how could he possibly impact a game at the level of a Top 10/Top 5 player?
Advanced Stats say KG was a slightly better player in his prime than Dirk was in his and I'm fine with that assessment. My personal bias is that it's a tossup and you can make a case either way for who was better. If KG was miles ahead of Dirk in rebounding, passing and defense, then how can Dirk can almost as much impact on a game when he is only "marginally better" when it comes to scoring? Is he not far more efficient when his turnover % for his career is 9% to KG's 12%? Advanced stats say he's in the ballpark of KG, but according to you, he's nothing more than a White Bob McAdoo.
For many years, Michael Jordan was considered the prototype of:
- unclutchness
- selfishness
- inability to lead
He was seen more or less the same way AI is seen today, just worse.
That's why I generally don't care much about that kind of intangibles stuff. They're merely a product of very fragile perceptions. This thread proves it - the "Pierce was the Celtics best player in the playoffs" is a great example of that.
Put KG or Dirk in the Spurs when they entered the league and they'd be seen as clutch/leader/etc.
Findog, what you think are advanced stats are mere summaries of boxscore statistics.
I just want you to learn how to use rebounding rate as the best metric to measure rebounding. Can you do that?
So Reggie Evans is an all-time great rebounder?
Total Rebound % - An estimate of the % of available rebounds a player grabs while he is on the floor. KG > Dirk. I don't agree with KG >>>> Dirk when it comes to this metric.
His career TRB% says he is a better rebounder than Kevin Garnett. I'm sure mogrovejo would agree.
So Win Shares and PER are summaries of box score statistics and not an example of advanced stats? I don't work for an NBA front office, so how would I have access to Daryl Morey's excel spreadsheets? What am I missing? I'm not being sarcastic, I want to learn as you say. What am I missing?
Huh? Why? Do you care to explain?
I mean, Dirk is a slightly bellow average rebounder; KG is one of the best in an era. If this difference is ">", what the heck is ">>>>"?
mogrovejo would condescendingly shoot down the notion that Evans gets rebounds because he expends no energy on offense, and frankly no energy on defense, and puts all his energy into rebounding.
If Dirk wanted to get 15 rebounds a night, he could. But he's putting alot more energy into different areas of the game. It's easier for Garnett to pick up rebounds when he's constantly deferring to teammates in the last five minutes of a close game.
Huh, yes. That's exactly what they are. That's exactly what their authors say they are. They're linear-weighted boxscore derived summary metrics. PER; WS, NBA Eff., etc. What do you think they should be?
How can I know? What are you missing about what?
You keep bringing the suporting cast argument with the hope that people think of those guys for what they look right now, when you know damn well that in that year all those guys played some of the best ball of their careers.
Do you remember when people started to question who was the best player in that Mavs squad: Dirk or Howard?
Terry: 17.1 pts, 47 FG% 41 3pt%
And then you had Harris, Stackhouse, Marquis Daniels, Dampier, Diop, Van Horn, Armstrong, Adrian Griffin.
You were stackeeeeed (like most of Cuban's years).
Maybe by Colin Cowherd or other talk radio types who watch 5 games a year tops. I don't know of many front office execs, coaches or scouts who ever saw MJ and Iverson as essentially the same player.
He didn't outplay Kobe in the Finals?That's why I generally don't care much about that kind of intangibles stuff. They're merely a product of very fragile perceptions. This thread proves it - the "Pierce was the Celtics best player in the playoffs" is a great example of that.
Only idiots questioned who was the Mavs best player.
Mavs were not stacked by any means. They had good depth but didn't have an all-NBA caliber sidekick to compliment Dirk. Think of the recent 2nd options on championship teams (Ginobili/Gasol/Pierce/Bryant/etc)... does JET or J-Ho come close to these kind of players?
JET/Howard were never top 25 players in the league.
But yes, '06 was a very good team... and Dirk led them to what should've been a le accordingly.
What is an example of an Advanced Stat? You say raw numbers are for children. What is an example of an advanced stat besides total rebound %? Effective Field Goal %? Offensive Rating? Turnover %?How can I know? What are you missing about what?
It's not only about the energy, it's about the time on the floor.
But Evans is a spectacular rebounder. That's why he had a NBA career.
Garnett was the best scorer in the last five minutes of close games for the Celtics in the 07/08 playoffs like he was for pretty much every team he played during his NBA career.
The problem with the rebounding is that Dirk isn't even close to Garnett. Rebounding was always one of Dirk's weaknesses. If he could rebound like Zach Randolph or one of those guys than yeah. But the difference is so gigantic that this conversation is a bit nonsensical. It's like we're discussing if Ray Allen was a better shooter than Ron Artest.
lol at people claiming scoring = rebounding = passes = defense in value and then finding categories in which KG is better than Dirk
You want your franchise player to be the best scorer on the floor, the one you can go to in the last minutes of a tie game and carry you to victory. That more than anything is what separates good players from the great ones. Dirk has that. If I need more rebounding I go get me a Ben Wallace for 1/4 of the price!
Who are those "people?" Re s?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
