Where Does This Put Dirk Amongst The Greats???

[JamStone]

individually some of those players skillsets outweight dirks, but you dont need to be a 2-way player to win rings if you have the correct players build around you. To say a Dirk led mavs team cant beat any of those players led teams is stupid...

Who said that?

[stretch]

Come on stretch. Don't act like KG never ever scored in the fourth quarter. And don't act like he's a defense only player. In the 2008 championship run, KG still averaged 20 PPG on 49.5% shooting. It's not like he was the equivalent to a Rodman or Ben Wallace where all he was good for was defense and rebounding.

No I'm not saying that at all, but to say he was a reliable crunchtime scorer would be every bit as ridiculous as it would be to say he never scored in the 4th.

KG was great in that run, no doubt, but all I said is that he was a bit of an anomaly, and not even that big of one, in being a guy who led a team to a championship, despite not really being a reliable crunchtime scorer, although he arguably was not the leader of that team either. I'd put that team more on par with the 03-04 Pistons, no one was really a clearcut leader, everyones roles were just very well defined and played well.

Being a clutch scorer is great and it's something you should definitely consider. You can't use that as the sole or even main barometer. If you have a great defender who also gives you 20 points on 50% shooting but isn't a great clutch scorer, it doesn't mean you ignore or dismiss the 20 PPG or the 10 rebounds. What good is a clutch scorer if your team isn't in position to win the game late? You still have to get there in the fourth quarter.

I agree completely. In Dirk's case, he will score all game, and score even better in the clutch. So I would much rather build a team from scratch around him, before a lot of other players, including KG. Obviously Dirk has other intangibles and such that dont get accounted for in the stat sheet, that has helped him to consistently lead teams to the playoffs, and with a LOT of differently built squads, going from run and gun, to isolation, to motion-based, with differing amounts of talent in each team. Dude brings a lot more than just scoring, as some people suggest. The mismatches he presents goes farther than people realize.

KG was the leader of that Celtics team, not Pierce. You even admitted that by saying Pierce was "every bit as much" was, meaning KG was at the very least also the leader. Pierce was considered the closer on the offensive end. I don't think many people considered him the leader of that team, despite the fact he was on that team longer.

Just in my personal opinion, that was Pierces team. Others say KG, and I won't neccesarily disagree, I can certainly see that side as well.

As for other examples of team leaders who weren't clutch scorers, you have Bill Russell, the winningest champion of all time and Ben Wallace of the 04 Pistons. The Pistons won because of their defense, not their offense. KG is in that company, except he was also a great offensive player. KG is very unique in that regard.

Russell is a bunch of crap, and the most overrated player in NBA history. Dude was just way ahead of his time, played in an era where he had by far the most stacked team of anyone, physically was ahead of virtually every player he faced, and there was what, like 8 teams in the NBA at that time?

So basically you have the 04 Pistons, and the 08 Celtics (both of which is questionable in many people's eyes to say whether Ben Wallace and KG were the clearcut leaders of their teams) as teams who won championships with their "leader" not being a crunchtime scorer. 2 teams in the past 30 years? Yeah, I'll take my chances building around a talented player who is capable of producing points in the clutch.

Would you take Jamal Crawford, considered a clutch shot maker, over LeBron James? Please tell me you would in order to support your argument.

Okay, now thats pushing it to support your own argument, by taking a top tier player, and comparing him to a 5th tier player. I never said that I would take a player that doesnt do jack all game but scores in the 4th, over a legit superstar. I'm talking about superstar players, period. If I chose to build a team around a superstar that is known for being a cold-blooded killer in crunchtime, as opposed to an all-around player that may be a suspect scorer when defenses clamp down, I'll take the former. It would be like the Kobe vs. Lebron comparison. IMO, Lebron is still the best player in the NBA, but if I had to build a team, especially after what he did in this series, I'm not too sure if he would be my first choice, considering you can find other well rounded players that can do what he does, but wont be relied upon to also score. For instance, if I had to choose between taking a duo of Lebron and Jamal Crawford, or Kobe and Tony Allen, I'll take Kobe and Tony Allen all day. I would rather my scorer be as elite as possible, as opposed to my defender/hustler being as elite as possible.

[stretch]

And he doesnt get the offense ran at him because Tyson Chandler is usually guarding the opposing teams' best bigman.

Actually, I saw Dirk guarding Aldrige and (especially) Gasol both quite a bit in their series, both of whom had limited success against him.

Yeah, the difficulty of scoring increases as you face tougher compe ion. But so does being able to stop teams ...being able to score in the clutch is extremely important, but being able to get stops down the stretch is just as important if not more. Just ask the run and gun Phoenix Suns.

Run and gun every bit as big of a reason why Phoenix lost. Dudes could not score in a half-court set, nor could they stop their opponent, both of which are incredibly important in basketball.

I'm not saying being able to defend is not important. My point is, defense is much more of a team concept than offense. One elite offensive player can damn near negate an entire team defense. Look at MJ, Kobe, Shaq, Bird, and a load of others for examples. Sure, they ultimately would need support from other players, but still were able to do quite a bit, just by themselves. Its a lot harder to build an elite offensive team without an elite offensive player, than it is to build an elite defensive team without an elite defensive player.

These players that get a pass usually have a solid all-around game despite being average defenders and/or have some multiple championships. You cant say the same for Dirk so yes his defensive shortcomings are enough to drop him into the 20-25 range imho. He's definitely a Top 10 offensive player of all-time though, maybe even Top 5.

20-25 is a little low imo, but its not that important. What is, is that Dirk finally won it all, and still has years left to go to add to it. Verdict is still not out yet.

[Henke]

As for ''where does this put Dirk amongst the greats'',dude is a top25 player.
After that,I could care less, if he's #17 or #19 or #25.

All I care is that Dirk Nowitzki is a champion,a Finals MVP and he had one of the most legendary postseason performances ever.

That said,the guys who think that Nowitzki's an average rebounder,they seriously need to do a better research.

Dude has been a very good defensive rebounder all career long,he's just below average on the offensive glass.
Yeah,this is very weird,considering that in every Mavs play he sets screens on the perimeter or he plays the decoy in the corner or he's shooting the ball.
He should just keep missing bunnies around the rim and collect his own misses,like the other ''great'' rebounders do.

As for the one dimensional ,it's undeniable that Nowitzki cannot impact the game on the defensive end but he's not a liability.
It is what it is,he's just an average defender.
He plays defense only with his smarts because his lateral quickness/athletic ability are non existant and that's why he's looking worse than he actually is on that end.

[cheguevara]

Dirk is closing in on #2 best Power Forward to ever play the game.

[JamStone]

stretch, you said verbatim:

ability to be a great leader > being a "two way player"

My issue is that you reduced "being a great leader" to basically scoring under pressure in the clutch. You somewhat retracted that later, but that's your gist. You take Dirk because he scores in the clutch and that's the main evidence you use to show he has the ability to be a great leader.

Questions for you. Before the Mavs won it all, who would most unbiased basketball fans say is a better leader, KG or Dirk? I take issue with you equating scoring in the clutch as being a great leader. In fact, there's more evidence that KG is a better leader than Dirk. Dirk isn't even vocal on or off the court. If anything, Kidd was more of a leader than Dirk. If you want to say Dirk led by example, that's fine. But to me, you equated him scoring under pressure as leading but then dismiss other ways a player could lead, including at the defensive end.

If you argued that "clutch scoring > being a two way player" then that would be different I might disagree, but it's something I can't argue as much. And that's not what you said. You said "ability to be a great leader > being a two way player." But you haven't really provided evidence why Dirk is a great leader and KG is not. To me, one could easily argue that KG is a two way player BUT ALSO a great leader. Vocal, emotional, directing teammates on and off the court, anchoring the defense. Anchoring an elite defense takes much more leadership responsibility than scoring in the clutch with individual talent and skill. You have to lead on defense. On offense, you can just score and score. Carmelo isn't a great leader on offense just because he's a good closer. But Dwight Howard is a leader on defense.

I just think you've put several skewed wrinkles in your argument to try to prove it.

Sure, my Jamal Crawford example was extreme. But sometimes an extreme example is what it takes to show why an argument is flawed.

[TimmehC]

2nd best German behind Uwe Blab.

[stretch]

stretch, you said verbatim:



My issue is that you reduced "being a great leader" to basically scoring under pressure in the clutch. You somewhat retracted that later, but that's your gist. You take Dirk because he scores in the clutch and that's the main evidence you use to show he has the ability to be a great leader.

That wasnt my intent. I probably should have explained it better.

Point was, just being a great two-way player is not always enough. Great leadership, IMO beats just being a two-way player with average leadership.

Questions for you. Before the Mavs won it all, who would most unbiased basketball fans say is a better leader, KG or Dirk? I take issue with you equating scoring in the clutch as being a great leader. In fact, there's more evidence that KG is a better leader than Dirk. Dirk isn't even vocal on or off the court. If anything, Kidd was more of a leader than Dirk. If you want to say Dirk led by example, that's fine. But to me, you equated him scoring under pressure as leading but then dismiss other ways a player could lead, including at the defensive end.

If you argued that "clutch scoring > being a two way player" then that would be different I might disagree, but it's something I can't argue as much. And that's not what you said. You said "ability to be a great leader > being a two way player." But you haven't really provided evidence why Dirk is a great leader and KG is not. To me, one could easily argue that KG is a two way player BUT ALSO a great leader. Vocal, emotional, directing teammates on and off the court, anchoring the defense. Anchoring an elite defense takes much more leadership responsibility than scoring in the clutch with individual talent and skill. You have to lead on defense. On offense, you can just score and score. Carmelo isn't a great leader on offense just because he's a good closer. But Dwight Howard is a leader on defense.

It was probably 50/50 from the opinions I heard from non-Mavs fans.

Again, I wasnt just trying to say scoring in the clutch is the only thing that makes you a leader. But its one of the big things that separates Dirk from KG. Dirk lets his play speak. KG would talk , scream all game long, call people "cancer patients" but would shy away from the ball in the 4th, and brick a load of shots. Dirk would score points, draw doubles and kick out for open shots, and create mismatches on defense. And consistently comes through for his teammates when they need him to, whether its grabbing a key rebound, playing strong late-game defense, or most of all, hitting a clutch shot with defenders all over him.

So who actually is the better leader, despite the appearances on the court? Just because KG is vocal nonstop and gets in opponents faces, doesnt mean jack if he doesnt come through consistently for his teammates when they need him most, something he has always been known for failing at.

I just think you've put several skewed wrinkles in your argument to try to prove it.

Sure, my Jamal Crawford example was extreme. But sometimes an extreme example is what it takes to show why an argument is flawed.

It's not so much that it was skewed, as opposed to not being fully explained, which is my fault.

I think the question for you to consider is what makes someone a great leader in sports?

If you ask me, I would say their ability to make the game easier for his teammates, and produce for his team when they need him most. That's why IMO Carmello isn't a great leader, despite being perhaps the most complete scorer in the league, while Kobe is a great leader. Kobe makes the game easier for his teammates, Carmello doesnt.

Perhaps our personal interpretations on what a leader truly is, is what leads to our disagreement on this subject, as opposed to one of us being wronger than the other.

[JamStone]

See, your "definition" of being a great leader blurs along the lines of just being a great player. There isn't much evidence that KG isn't a great leader. Is he an obnoxious ? Yup. But that doesn't make him not a leader. For me, great leaders do more than just lead by example. They are vocal and emotional. They are quasi-coaches to their teammates. Their passion and intensity is infectious. Being quiet and reserved and ho-hum is rarely related to leading. That's why I would say Jason Kidd is more of a leader on the Mavs than Dirk. Dirk is without a doubt the best player on the team. But I don't know he's been such a great leader for most of his career.

This season might be the first time he showed leadership qualities, like yelling at Jason Terry after that missed assignment on defense that allowed that open three by Chalmers. He screamed at a few teammates this playoff season. But that's more of a retreat from his normal demeanor for most of his career. He's never struck anyone as the guy that gets in teammates' faces to challenge and push them to become better.

To me, being a great player doesn't automatically make you a great leader.

As for who would have been considered a better leader before the Mavs won it all, I whole-heartedly disagree that it would have been about 50/50 from unbiased fans (that includes excluding KG haters). I would say it would have been something closer to like 75/25 in KG's favor. You can hate KG all you want, but he has a leadership personality. I don't think you can say the same thing about Dirk. Dirk is an unbelievably talented player. He doesn't strike me as a great leader.

[stretch]

Dirk - won championship as undisputed #1 option on his team
KG - won championship as very questionable #1 option on his team, more of a 1a/1b option at best

yet dirk isnt a great leader, simply because hes not a super vocal guy? okay.

I really don't hate KG at all anymore. In fact, he earned a lot of respect from me in last years run against the Lakers. Dude was the only one who was showing up when everything else was going wrong for Boston in the second half of G7.

IMO, hes the 3rd best PF of all time, behind only Timmy and Dirk.

[stretch]

As for who would have been considered a better leader before the Mavs won it all, I whole-heartedly disagree that it would have been about 50/50 from unbiased fans (that includes excluding KG haters). I would say it would have been something closer to like 75/25 in KG's favor. You can hate KG all you want, but he has a leadership personality. I don't think you can say the same thing about Dirk. Dirk is an unbelievably talented player. He doesn't strike me as a great leader.

in addition to this, while i had recently been hearing a lot more love for Dirk as a leader, even before this series (which is why I said its closer to 50/50), lets not kid ourselves... if Dirk was black, or if KG was white, this would be discussed by the general public in a COMPLETELY different light. not saying your opinion or mine would be different, but there are a LOT who would have much different opinions. if you or anyone says otherwise, thats just ignorant.

[JamStone]

Dirk's championship is greater than KG's because Dirk was definitely the undisputed #1 guy on his championship team. I still don't buy that that necessarily makes you a leader. Being vocal isn't the only thing I said. But not being vocal at all for most of his career doesn't help your argument for him being a great leader either. The only thing you have to fall back on is his talent. His talent is undeniable. Great, great player. That doesn't make him a great leader. Once again, you are blurring "great leader" with "great player."

And I while I used to be a big KG fan in the past, I hate how he acts on the court now. I think he's an ass on the court when he barks and goes after small guards. I think he's obnoxious and a bag. But those things don't negate his leadership abilities. His passion and intensity is contagious with his teammates. And he does help coach and mentor the younger guys on his team. You see it with Glen Davis and Rondo. KG is always in their ear. And how hard he plays is the type of lead-by-example characteristic that really exemplifies leadership. Scoring, making tough buckets isn't leading by example. Dirk making one-foot fade-away jumpers doesn't all of a sudden mean, "hey everyone else take these shots and do the same as me." That's not leadership. It's just scoring. But when someone amps it up on defense, now that can be infectious, contagious. I just really disagree with you on this one.


I'm not even going to get in a race discussion. Whether it has anything to do with this discussion or not (and I don't agree that it has much beyond ignorant people), I think it's silly to even bring it up. I don't even want to respond to it...

[dbestpro]

He is the greatest power forward to ever play the game whose team has won one championship.

[lefty]

[stretch]

Dirk's championship is greater than KG's because Dirk was definitely the undisputed #1 guy on his championship team. I still don't buy that that necessarily makes you a leader. Being vocal isn't the only thing I said. But not being vocal at all for most of his career doesn't help your argument for him being a great leader either. The only thing you have to fall back on is his talent. His talent is undeniable. Great, great player. That doesn't make him a great leader. Once again, you are blurring "great leader" with "great player."

And I while I used to be a big KG fan in the past, I hate how he acts on the court now. I think he's an ass on the court when he barks and goes after small guards. I think he's obnoxious and a bag. But those things don't negate his leadership abilities. His passion and intensity is contagious with his teammates. And he does help coach and mentor the younger guys on his team. You see it with Glen Davis and Rondo. KG is always in their ear. And how hard he plays is the type of lead-by-example characteristic that really exemplifies leadership. Scoring, making tough buckets isn't leading by example. Dirk making one-foot fade-away jumpers doesn't all of a sudden mean, "hey everyone else take these shots and do the same as me." That's not leadership. It's just scoring. But when someone amps it up on defense, now that can be infectious, contagious. I just really disagree with you on this one.

agree to disagree. in the end, these are two of the greatest players in NBA history, and we are really fortunate to be able to have seen them play in their primes. their love for the game and love for doing whatever they can to help their team win is something more players need.

I'm not even going to get in a race discussion. Whether it has anything to do with this discussion or not (and I don't agree that it has much beyond ignorant people), I think it's silly to even bring it up. I don't even want to respond to it...

my point is that in your 75/25 opinion, there are a lot of ignorant people in there who unfortunately allow race to sway those figures. but anyone with any sort of actual logical thinking, knows how ignorant it is to say they would rather choose KG to lead their team to victory over Dirk. proof is in the pudding. Dirk has done it more, and on a far greater scale than KG has.

[Amaso]

Dirk - won championship as undisputed #1 option on his team
KG - won championship as very questionable #1 option on his team, more of a 1a/1b option at best

yet dirk isnt a great leader, simply because hes not a super vocal guy? okay.

I really don't hate KG at all anymore. In fact, he earned a lot of respect from me in last years run against the Lakers. Dude was the only one who was showing up when everything else was going wrong for Boston in the second half of G7.

IMO, hes the 3rd best PF of all time, behind only Timmy and Dirk.

As much as I like Dirk, I don't think you can put him ABOVE KG, probably on the same tier. Yeah KG might have been a 1a/1b option on a team, but thats only on one side of the ball. KG anchored that great Boston defense... something Dirk can't do obviously. I don't know where I have Garnett ranked on the PF list, let alone an all-time list. I don't think it's as simple as saying Garnett is better on offense than Dirk is on defense therefore he is better, because team's can usually cover up defensive deficiencies to some extent.

[JamStone]

my point is that in your 75/25 opinion, there are a lot of ignorant people in there who unfortunately allow race to sway those figures. but anyone with any sort of actual logical thinking, knows how ignorant it is to say they would rather choose KG to lead their team to victory over Dirk. proof is in the pudding. Dirk has done it more, and on a far greater scale than KG has.

My point is take away all biased fans. Take away Mavs fans and Celtics fans, Minnesota fans, and people who either love or hate either KG or Dirk, based on race or whatever other reasons. I think if you asked unbiased fans before the Mavs won it all, most would argue that KG has been more of a leader in his career than Dirk has been. Not close to a 50/50 split. If you want to agree to disagree on that point too, fine. That's what I believe. Dirk has not been considered a "great leader" most of his career. And even now, I think Kidd was more of the team leader than Dirk.


Now you didn't like my Jamal Crawford example, so I'll give you two more with comparisons of players who are at the same or close to the same overall talent.

Who would you build a team around in these two player comparisons:

LeBron James or Carmelo Anthony?

Dwight Howard or Amare Stoudemire?

Your contention revolves around building a team around the guy that can score under pressure over a great two way player. Well both Carmel and Amare are guys who can score under pressure. And LeBron and Dwight are two way players who have issues closing games, LeBron because of mental issues and Dwight because of his free throw shooting and for most of his career lack of go-to moves on offense. Based on your logic, you'd choose Carmelo and Amare. I think most people would go the other way and build their teams around LeBron and Dwight.

[jack0fspeed]

My all-time PF list would be:
Duncan - Best 2 way PF ever. 4 rings. Had good but not great supporting cast.
Pe - Don't know his game too well, but I give him a lot of credit for being the one guy to beat Russell's Celtics
Dirk - Unstoppable on offensive end. So-so defender. Good supporting cast in 2003, but not so much in other years. Led his team to a championship as franchise player. Could easily have another couple rings if he hadn't gotten hurt in 2003 and if Bennett Salvatore doesn't make a touch call at the end of G5 in 2006.
Kark Malone - Primarily offensive player. Great scorer that could run the floor, range out to 20ft and post ups. could easily have a ring or two if he didn't have to beat MJ. Played with another all-time great in John Stockton.
Elvin Hayes - Excellent offensive player and rebounder. Paired with HoF Center Wes Unseld to win his championship.
Kevin McHale - 3rd best 2-way PF all time. Played with HoF SF Larry Bird and strong supporting cast to get 3 rings.
Kevin Garnet - 2nd best 2-way PF all time. Couldn't lead a team to a championship as a franchise player. Paired with all-stars Ray Allen and Paul Pierce to eventually get his championship.
Elgin Baylor - Tremendous offensive player that often averaged > 30 ppg. Had range, post-ups and every shot in the book. Undersized at 6'5", never had a good supporting cast and no rings.

[dunkman]

Well it's not only that Dirk won the championship for the Mavs, it's also how he did it.

He completely outclassed Kobe, Durant, LeBron and Wade. The Mavs dominated against some really good teams. Plus Dirk was the only all-star of that team. That performance was very similar to what Duncan did in 2003, which would put him automatically in any all time greats list probably around #20.

Dirk is a phenomenal offensive player, an average defensive player since some time and he was always been above average rebounder. It's not easy to average 8.4 rpg in the NBA. His rebounding slipped a little bit during the regular season, but he did good in the playoffs.

I think that Dirk has left all PF's behind, except for Duncan who has better career. And Dirk is still going strong, this is his prime time. He could win again the next season. The Mavs had 'Bois and Butler injured.

[stretch]

My point is take away all biased fans. Take away Mavs fans and Celtics fans, Minnesota fans, and people who either love or hate either KG or Dirk, based on race or whatever other reasons. I think if you asked unbiased fans before the Mavs won it all, most would argue that KG has been more of a leader in his career than Dirk has been. Not close to a 50/50 split. If you want to agree to disagree on that point too, fine. That's what I believe. Dirk has not been considered a "great leader" most of his career. And even now, I think Kidd was more of the team leader than Dirk.


Now you didn't like my Jamal Crawford example, so I'll give you two more with comparisons of players who are at the same or close to the same overall talent.

Who would you build a team around in these two player comparisons:

LeBron James or Carmelo Anthony?

Dwight Howard or Amare Stoudemire?

Your contention revolves around building a team around the guy that can score under pressure over a great two way player. Well both Carmel and Amare are guys who can score under pressure. And LeBron and Dwight are two way players who have issues closing games, LeBron because of mental issues and Dwight because of his free throw shooting and for most of his career lack of go-to moves on offense. Based on your logic, you'd choose Carmelo and Amare. I think most people would go the other way and build their teams around LeBron and Dwight.

You obviously didnt read my post explaining myself a little further. Either that, or you just chose to forget.

It's not JUST about scoring well in the clutch. That was just one of the things I felt separates Dirk from KG, and the thing I used There are plenty of other factors he provides, that Amare doesnt provide over Dwight, or Carmello over Lebron.

Dwight is FAR superior at making teammates better than Amare. Lebron is FAR superior at making teammates better than Lebron. That's what sets them apart from each other.

Likewise, Dirk is superior at making teammates better than KG. In addition, he is a FAR better crunchtime player. Scoring/playmaking is the most notable area, but Dirk also steps up in areas that his game normally is not strong, such as defense and rebounding. Come crunchtime, his defense is solid, and he consistently has key rebounds. KG on the other hand has been known to crumble offensively when crunchtime hits.

If you really want, I can name more areas in which Dirk curbstomps KG. I don't think that would be neccesary, but considering you just want to take one example I mention and run with it, instead of actually thinking for yourself other ways in which Dirk leads his team in a superior manner to KG, I probably will need to make a long, organized list just for you. But no thanks, I'll let you do that yourself. You are smart enough to know Dirk affects the game in more ways than just scoring points, but for some reason choose to be ignorant right now.

[jack0fspeed]

I pretty much look at everything through the prism of ... what kind of supporting cast would you have needed to win a championship.

I could have put Barkley in there too ... as high as above Garnett. He led his team to the finals in 1993 as the main man with a supporting cast of KJ and Dan Majerle (which I would call so-so). No shame in losing to MJ. But the losing to Utah in 1997 (playing w/Olajuwon and Drexler) took him down a few pegs in my book.

[JamStone]

Likewise, Dirk is superior at making teammates better than KG.

Explain that one. Earlier, you talked about drawing double teams and kicking out to teammates and causing mismatches as if KG doesn't do that. And KG is known as a better passer than Dirk anyway. The things you say about Dirk making teammates better apply at least equally to KG, and that's just on the offensive side of the ball.

Crunchtime play favors Dirk. I won't disagree with that. Just like defense overwhelmingly favors KG. It's a matter of how much weight you put in either as to how you will decide which is the better player.

But this goes back to my question about leadership. How do any of those things relate to leadership abilities? You're using the greatness of a player and automatically translating that to leadership.

Here's your problem. You're looking at all the strengths Dirk possesses on offense and then customarily dismissing all the other things KG brings to the table and use only those strength on offense and equating them to leadership. Remember, my issue is with leadership. I have no problem with anyone thinking Dirk is a better player than KG. I'm questioning how you apply these things to Dirk being a great leader. You see, you'll say Dirk will come up big with a rebound or a defensive play when it matters. For every time Dirk might do something other than scoring a clutch basket in crunchtime, I could argue KG will do something other than getting a rebound or making a block on defense. What about KG making a clutch pass in crunchtime? How about setting a solid pick that frees up Ray Allen for the winning jumper? How about getting a huge offensive rebound for an extra possession in crunchtime. You see, your argument always reverts to and gets reduced to Dirk scoring in crunchtime. You add little extras like getting a key rebound sometimes or making a solid defensive play sometimes. I could say KG does the same thing sometimes, even hitting a clutch jumper, which he has done a few (seldom) times the last few post seasons. But you always reduce it down to scoring in crunchtime. And then you just ignore other things KG brings to the table because it's only about "scoring in crunchtime." Forget KG is a better passer. Forget he sets better picks or is a better offensive rebounder, which can be plays made in crunchtime. Forget he can be a clutch defender. To you, it's boils down to scoring in crunchtime.

I'm still waiting for how that equates to leadership.

[stretch]

Explain that one. Earlier, you talked about drawing double teams and kicking out to teammates and causing mismatches as if KG doesn't do that. And KG is known as a better passer than Dirk anyway. The things you say about Dirk making teammates better apply at least equally to KG, and that's just on the offensive side of the ball.

Crunchtime play favors Dirk. I won't disagree with that. Just like defense overwhelmingly favors KG. It's a matter of how much weight you put in either as to how you will decide which is the better player.

But this goes back to my question about leadership. How do any of those things relate to leadership abilities? You're using the greatness of a player and automatically translating that to leadership.

Here's your problem. You're looking at all the strengths Dirk possesses on offense and then customarily dismissing all the other things KG brings to the table and use only those strength on offense and equating them to leadership. Remember, my issue is with leadership. I have no problem with anyone thinking Dirk is a better player than KG. I'm questioning how you apply these things to Dirk being a great leader. You see, you'll say Dirk will come up big with a rebound or a defensive play when it matters. For every time Dirk might do something other than scoring a clutch basket in crunchtime, I could argue KG will do something other than getting a rebound or making a block on defense. What about KG making a clutch pass in crunchtime? How about setting a solid pick that frees up Ray Allen for the winning jumper? How about getting a huge offensive rebound for an extra possession in crunchtime. You see, your argument always reverts to and gets reduced to Dirk scoring in crunchtime. You add little extras like getting a key rebound sometimes or making a solid defensive play sometimes. I could say KG does the same thing sometimes, even hitting a clutch jumper, which he has done a few (seldom) times the last few post seasons. But you always reduce it down to scoring in crunchtime. And then you just ignore other things KG brings to the table because it's only about "scoring in crunchtime." Forget KG is a better passer. Forget he sets better picks or is a better offensive rebounder, which can be plays made in crunchtime. Forget he can be a clutch defender. To you, it's boils down to scoring in crunchtime.

I'm still waiting for how that equates to leadership.

Okay. Since Dirk doesnt scream, yell, get in peoples faces, and act tough, he is a lesser leader than Kevin Garnett.

You win. Congrats. Next time I play ball, I'm going to scream in the faces of my opponent every time I score, scream in the face of my teammate every time they up, and punch my chest 300 times a game, so that I can be the best possible leader. Hopefully it works out for me








that.


Again, I'm talking about what I want for a team if I were to build one. I would rather have a guy who cannot be denied on the offensive end, as opposed to a guy who runs around and sets great picks, gets big blocks, gets offensive rebounds, and all that . If I want all of that in one player, I could just get Tyson Chandler, or Andrew Bynum.

I'm not so sure why you are intent on downplaying Dirk's leadership abilities. Basically you are downplaying him because he doesnt do things that the team uses their center (in this case, Tyson Chandler) to do, or because he doesnt scream, yell, and pound his chest.

You sit here saying that all I'm doing is downplaying the other things KG does well, such as defense, rebounding, and setting picks, while you are doing the same damn thing to Dirk. Do you realize how frequently Dirk plays good defense down the stretch, gets key rebounds down the stretch, and frees up his teammates with solid picks? Or how about this... what is the #1 go-to play that the Mavs use in late game situations? Hint: its not a Dirk iso. It's a ing pick-and-roll with Terry. And how many times has it gotten Terry open for huge, key shots that he nailed? A load of times.

I think I've already stated that its NOT just clutch points that Dirk puts up that makes him a great leader. But what I said that sets Dirk APART from KG, is his clutch scoring, because just like KG, he plays solid defense (not as good as KG, but still pretty solid), gets key rebounds (I've seen numerous times in head to head situations, Dirk has owned the out of KG when getting rebounds down the stretch), and hustles in other various ways.

[JamStone]

You still haven't told me why Dirk is a great leader. I'm still waiting. Why is Dirk a great leader? That's basically what I've been asking you like 10 times already. You respond with what resorts to he's great at scoring under pressure. Why does that make him a great leader? Then you rephrase what I say about KG by saying all I've said was that he's vocal when that's not true either.

KG gets into his teammates ears, not just by yelling, but as a player-coach type on the court. Even when KG was a 20 point scorer, he was also a 4-5 assist man as a PF. And it wasn't just out of double team kickouts. KG could actually pass like a guard. And you see that his intensity and emotion are contagious particularly on defense. That on defense, those are the type of lead-by-example traits does affect teammates. Dirk scoring in the clutch or passing out of a double team doesn't equate to leadership.

Your "what separates Dirk from KG" is bull . And I think you know it.

Forget everything else I wrote. Forget everything else you wrote.

What makes Dirk a great leader? I don't want "he makes teammates better by getting them open shots because he's a great scorer." I don't want "Dirk in a pick-and-roll gives Terry open jumpers." That doesn't say Dirk is a leader. Give me legit examples that show Dirk is a great leader.

Forget everything else we've discussed. Be serious right now. What in Dirk's career demonstrate that he's a great leader. Not great player. Not clutch scorer. A great leader. That is the claim I first had issues with. I want to know why Dirk is a great leader.

[ambchang]

Top ten (not in order):
Kareem
Wilt
Russell
Jordan
Magic
Bird
Moses
Duncan
Shaq
Hakeem

Next 5:
Havlicek
Kobe
Big O
Barkley
Robinson

15-20:
Dirk
Malone
McHale
Pet
West