Spurfan needs to let go of their sentimental/nostalgic attachment to David Robinson..

[Killakobe81]

Killa = most spur-friendly lakerfan, I've seen him show love for Duncan/Gino/Pop

Yep them 3 I would take on my squad anyday and twice in the Finals ...

Frenchy, RJ, Avery (hate that voice) and Bowen I despise i even hate him as an analyst. That bowtie is hideous ...

[Bill_Brasky]

Yep them 3 I would take on my squad anyday and twice in the Finals ...

Frenchy, RJ, Avery (hate that voice) and Bowen I despise i even hate him as an analyst. That bowtie is hideous ...

Soft spot in my heart for Bruce/Parker though

[ambchang]

Saying perimeter players have an effect on a big man's offensive game is picking and choosing? What brand of basketball are you watching.

Please name me one dominant big who won a championship without some legit outside threat.

Wilt had it
Russell had a whole team of them, and he doesn't even need to score.
Kareem had it
Moses had it
Hakeem had it
Shaq had it
Duncan had it
Even Ewing, Malone and Barkley had it

I am not sure who I missed, but really, I just can't think of a championship winning #1 big who won it all without legit outside threats.

[ambchang]

I was incorrect 2.5 years ago to think he was done. You happy?

You were actually wrong 2.5 years ago, and even more wrong now.

Dirk has always been good enough to be the #1 on a championship team since 05/06 or so, but he just never had the support. He never had the team built around him to magnify his strengths like the 11 team. That 11 team supporting cast was by no means amazing, but it does compliment Dirk very well and allowed him to win the championship.

The ideal team for Dirk would be:
1) Interior defender (Chandler)
2) Outside shooter/slasher (Turtle, Barrea)
3) Perimeter defender (Marion, could definitely be upgraded, and Kidd)
4) Floor general who can nail open shots (Kidd).

That team certainly could be upgraded, and the Mavs would be more devastating, and Dirk certainly made his mark in the 11 playoffs, but it's not because he all of a sudden became a better leader and is more clutch, that's for lazy writers who don't understand the game.

[stretch]

lol Sean Elliott
lol Chuck Person
lol Vinny Del Negro

lol all above 35% career 3pt shooters
lol all shot over 38% in the 94-95 season, Davey's best opportunity

lol legit outside threats

[stretch]

You were actually wrong 2.5 years ago, and even more wrong now.

Dirk has always been good enough to be the #1 on a championship team since 05/06 or so, but he just never had the support. He never had the team built around him to magnify his strengths like the 11 team. That 11 team supporting cast was by no means amazing, but it does compliment Dirk very well and allowed him to win the championship.

The ideal team for Dirk would be:
1) Interior defender (Chandler)
2) Outside shooter/slasher (Turtle, Barrea)
3) Perimeter defender (Marion, could definitely be upgraded, and Kidd)
4) Floor general who can nail open shots (Kidd).

That team certainly could be upgraded, and the Mavs would be more devastating, and Dirk certainly made his mark in the 11 playoffs, but it's not because he all of a sudden became a better leader and is more clutch, that's for lazy writers who don't understand the game.

I don't disagree with anything posted here, whatsoever.

[Killakobe81]

Saying perimeter players have an effect on a big man's offensive game is picking and choosing? What brand of basketball are you watching.

Please name me one dominant big who won a championship without some legit outside threat.

Wilt had it
Russell had a whole team of them, and he doesn't even need to score.
Kareem had it
Moses had it
Hakeem had it
Shaq had it
Duncan had it
Even Ewing, Malone and Barkley had it

I am not sure who I missed, but really, I just can't think of a championship winning #1 big who won it all without legit outside threats.

Disagree. Maybe he had it with Houston but by then Ewing wa spast his prime. I loved starks but we saw what he did in Game 7 of the Finals ...

[stretch]

I really don't get ambchangs real issue.

Is his issue the fact that myself and others are putting a great emphasis on winning? That's basically what it appears to be.

So winning suddenly isn't that important anymore?

Okay.

[Bill_Brasky]

The thing is that Dirk is a big who IS a legit outside scoring threat.

[DPG21920]

No Stretch, winning is important, but the importance Mav fan is placing one le is what's out of whack.

The fact remains that even Mav fan would say, along with most every pundit that before this last year David was ahead of Dirk. While the ring certainly helps Dirk in any discussion I refuse to believe that winning 1 ring with a well balanced team even if he was the number 1 offensive option changes the player he was. If he wasn't regarded as better than David before the ring and he didn't improve as an overall player, winning the ring doesn't jump him.

1 ring is great and a lot more than many but unless you are winning multiple rings as the clear cut man, it doesn't drastically change my rankings. The truly dominant number 1's all ring more than once. I could also understand if David had 0, but he has two rings even if it's not as the number one guy.

[FkLA]

Im with you Stretch, if the two players are CLOSE just as Kobe/duncan and Dirk/David are, then the rings should end the debate.

So basically you have the same re ed stretch logic that how those rings were won shouldnt be analyzed?

It doesnt matter that Kobe plays in a team that has historically always won, that he had a Top 10 player of all-time during his prime by his side for 3 of them, or that his payroll was always greater than Duncan's Spurs? All that matters is he has 5 and Duncan has 4 right? Just forget that Duncan's cir stances were tougher considering he did it in a small-market city that hadnt won anything before him and likely wont without him and with a low payroll. It's like Kobe winning 5 at NC or Duncan winning 4 at Gonzaga or something...tell me which is more impressive?

You do the same for the Dirk/DRob argument. Robinson never had the depth or the type of solid veterans Dirk had on his team this year. He never had his teammates perform the way some of Dirk's did either, despite being doubled and focused on by opposing defenses just as much.

[FkLA]

No Stretch, winning is important, but the importance Mav fan is placing one le is what's out of whack.

The fact remains that even Mav fan would say, along with most every pundit that before this last year David was ahead of Dirk. While the ring certainly helps Dirk in any discussion I refuse to believe that winning 1 ring with a well balanced team even if he was the number 1 offensive option changes the player he was. If he wasn't regarded as better than David before the ring and he didn't improve as an overall player, winning the ring doesn't jump him.

1 ring is great and a lot more than many but unless you are winning multiple rings as the clear cut man, it doesn't drastically change my rankings. The truly dominant number 1's all ring more than once. I could also understand if David had 0, but he has two rings even if it's not as the number one guy.

Funny thing is he was a second-tier franchise player most of his career. How many years can you look back on and say Dirk was a Top 5 player in the league? Or that he was the best player at his position? You can count them on one hand yet now mavfan wants to place him as a Top 20 or even Top 15 player of all-time after one ring.

[Stalin]

Funny thing is he was a second-tier franchise player most of his career. How many years can you look back on and say Dirk was a Top 5 player in the league? Or that he was the best player at his position? You can count them on one hand yet now mavfan wants to place him as a Top 20 or even Top 15 player of all-time after one ring.

Co sign

[stretch]

No Stretch, winning is important, but the importance Mav fan is placing one le is what's out of whack.

The fact remains that even Mav fan would say, along with most every pundit that before this last year David was ahead of Dirk. While the ring certainly helps Dirk in any discussion I refuse to believe that winning 1 ring with a well balanced team even if he was the number 1 offensive option changes the player he was. If he wasn't regarded as better than David before the ring and he didn't improve as an overall player, winning the ring doesn't jump him.

1 ring is great and a lot more than many but unless you are winning multiple rings as the clear cut man, it doesn't drastically change my rankings. The truly dominant number 1's all ring more than once. I could also understand if David had 0, but he has two rings even if it's not as the number one guy.

ROFL

this is pure gold. spurfan at their finest.

"rings only mean something if you have more than one! if you only get one, it means you are as ty as anyone else!!!!!!!!!"

[Bill_Brasky]

ROFL

this is pure gold. spurfan at their finest.

"rings only mean something if you have more than one! if you only get one, it means you are as ty as anyone else!!!!!!!!!"

More re ed than the logic of

"1 ring as the main guy is so much more important than 2 as second fiddle, even if that team would have never stood a chance without you on it"

?

[Veterinarian.]

Explain why Duncan>Malone please.

[Killakobe81]

So basically you have the same re ed stretch logic that how those rings were won shouldnt be analyzed?

It doesnt matter that Kobe plays in a team that has historically always won, that he had a Top 10 player of all-time during his prime by his side for 3 of them, or that his payroll was always greater than Duncan's Spurs? All that matters is he has 5 and Duncan has 4 right? Just forget that Duncan's cir stances were tougher considering he did it in a small-market city that hadnt won anything before him and likely wont without him and with a low payroll. It's like Kobe winning 5 at NC or Duncan winning 4 at Gonzaga or something...tell me which is more impressive?

You do the same for the Dirk/DRob argument. Robinson never had the depth or the type of solid veterans Dirk had on his team this year. He never had his teammates perform the way some of Dirk's did either, despite being doubled and focused on by opposing defenses just as much.

HUH?
1. So Mj shoul have points taken away because he beat an aging Lakers or Pistons instead of the prime 80's Lakers, Celtics or sixers?

2. So Dirk beating the defending champ Lakers, the new power Heat and thunder is LESS impressive than beating a young Cavs with Lebron but no wade or Bosh? or Beating the powerhouse NJ Nets? Or a Ewing-less Knicks team? Only run that compares is when you beat the pistons in the finals. Sure the Lakers were on fumes but the Mavs run led by dirk is every bit as impressive as any of the Spur le runs.

3. though no small market, what had Dallas won? As you pointed out many doubted dirk could even carry a team to a ring as the #1 ...he did.

4. I never said how the rings were won or shouldnt be analyzed but only the land of wizards, tongue rings, D&D and calf tats would anyone argue that Kobe/duncan or Dirk/David is not at least close enough to debate. So I think if it's close ring counts is the deciding factor. You do not. that is cool.

*BTW ...no i dont think Horry is better than Malone becuase he has more rings. that is stupid. Malone is miles better. it's only when the debate is close do rings matter.

*Just waiting for a dumbass to bring up Horry or john Salley ...

[stretch]

fwiw, I can understand TO AN EXTENT, what DPG is trying to say here, but its entirely situational. If Dirk were to have won a championship, and was mostly carried by great teammates, then I'd be inclined to say that it wasn't as significant of a championship for that particular player's legacy. For instance, the 2007 championship, IMO isn't as big for Timmy's legacy as the 2003 one was. In 2007, while he was the centerpiece, he many times was outshined by Parker and Ginobili. But in 2003, that was almost 100% Timmy putting the team on his back and elevating their play.

However, in Dirk's case, he flat out put the team on his back, and carried them almost 100% of the time. In the few moments where he was not at his best, they stepped up, which is normal. No player has been borderline perfect in an entire playoff run, not even MJ. But generally, Dirk was far and away the best basketball player in the entire playoff picture. Dirk has almost always been a monster and dominant in the playoffs, especially over the past 3-4 years. But this year in particular, he seemed even more focused than I had ever seen him before, and put the Mavs on his back in a way I had never seen before. Even though he was playing incredibly well in previous years, he just seemed to be forcing his own will on games this time around, instead of taking what came to him. He forced defenses to adjust to him playing in the post, instead of attacking whatever defense was presented to him. He forced defenses to have to completely focus their entire attack on stopping him, giving his teammates more room than ever to work with. THAT is where this year I had seen the biggest difference in Dirk that I hadn't seen before. I felt Dirk was capable of leading a team to a championship prior to this season, but I honestly thought he would need better teammates around him to do so. But the way he enforced his will on the game this year, was the difference maker, and the #1 reason the Mavs not only won, but dominated. If you really want to see the difference he made, check out his own personal plus-minus. The Mavs were pathetic as when he went out of the game, but when he was in the game, they were completely dominant.

The last time I have seen a single player completely dominate an entire playoff run to winning an NBA le the way Dirk did, was the 2003 Timmy. Before that, it had to be MJ.

[Killakobe81]

Co sign

Tought to say top 15 but top 25 is possible.

Now keep in mind I dont rate players I never saw, so to crack my top 25 is a bit easier but wherever Dirk is on my list David is right there. Many on here act as though David should be many spots higher, I don't see it.

[DPG21920]

ROFL

this is pure gold. spurfan at their finest.

"rings only mean something if you have more than one! if you only get one, it means you are as ty as anyone else!!!!!!!!!"

ROFL missing the point completely then saying you and the whole world was wrong about Dirk since he rang although he was past his prime and didn't improve.

Dirk pre-ring in prime: very good player, second tier #1 option, flawed all around game, not considered a top 25 player of all time

Dirk post-ring: No improvement, past his prime, wins ring, #2 pf of all time

Ok.

[Killakobe81]

fwiw, I can understand TO AN EXTENT, what DPG is trying to say here, but its entirely situational. If Dirk were to have won a championship, and was mostly carried by great teammates, then I'd be inclined to say that it wasn't as significant of a championship for that particular player's legacy. For instance, the 2007 championship, IMO isn't as big for Timmy's legacy as the 2003 one was. In 2007, while he was the centerpiece, he many times was outshined by Parker and Ginobili. But in 2003, that was almost 100% Timmy putting the team on his back and elevating their play.

However, in Dirk's case, he flat out put the team on his back, and carried them almost 100% of the time. In the few moments where he was not at his best, they stepped up, which is normal. No player has been borderline perfect in an entire playoff run, not even MJ. But generally, Dirk was far and away the best basketball player in the entire playoff picture. Dirk has almost always been a monster and dominant in the playoffs, especially over the past 3-4 years. But this year in particular, he seemed even more focused than I had ever seen him before, and put the Mavs on his back in a way I had never seen before. Even though he was playing incredibly well in previous years, he just seemed to be forcing his own will on games this time around, instead of taking what came to him. He forced defenses to adjust to him playing in the post, instead of attacking whatever defense was presented to him. He forced defenses to have to completely focus their entire attack on stopping him, giving his teammates more room than ever to work with. THAT is where this year I had seen the biggest difference in Dirk that I hadn't seen before. I felt Dirk was capable of leading a team to a championship prior to this season, but I honestly thought he would need better teammates around him to do so. But the way he enforced his will on the game this year, was the difference maker, and the #1 reason the Mavs not only won, but dominated. If you really want to see the difference he made, check out his own personal plus-minus. The Mavs were pathetic as when he went out of the game, but when he was in the game, they were completely dominant.

The last time I have seen a single player completely dominate an entire playoff run to winning an NBA le the way Dirk did, was the 2003 Timmy. Before that, it had to be MJ.

You had me up until here. cases can be made for Wade, Duncan, Pierce, Kobe, Shaq that made similar runs some more than others. But dirk was amazing. I will say best shooting season I have ever seen from a volume shooter ...ever. When counting regular season through finals.

[Bill_Brasky]

Yes. Dirk stepped up(amazingly) for 1 playoffs. I think when he walked off the court without even celebrating the WCF he made it known that he wasn't being stopped and was already gameplanning for Mimai. I say his legacy is still TBD. If he has another amazing run he jumps plenty of people. If he comes up short again, people will look back and say he got lucky one year.

[stretch]

ROFL missing the point completely then saying you and the whole world was wrong about Dirk since he rang although he was past his prime and didn't improve.

Dirk pre-ring in prime: very good player, second tier #1 option, flawed all around game, not considered a top 25 player of all time

Dirk post-ring: No improvement, past his prime, wins ring, #2 pf of all time

Ok.

He most definitely did improve, and apparently wasn't past his prime as we thought. He developed a post game, and a mentality that he wouldn't be denied. He apparently peaked a little later than most players do, even if it isn't in sync with his physical development.

I had said even prior to the playoff run, that Dirk IMO is arguably the #2 PF of all time. The way he put the Mavs on his back and won a championship just sealed that argument away, because he accomplished generally the same things Barkley, KG, and Malone had... great consistency, won an MVP, and was the #1 option on teams that went deep in the playoffs, but with no championships to show. Dirk did what none of those guys were able to accomplish, which makes it more than deserving for him to be viewed on a greater pedestal than they are.

[stretch]

You had me up until here. cases can be made for Wade, Pierce, Kobe Shaq that made similar runs some more than others. But dirk was amazing. I will say best shooting season I have ever seen from a volume shooter ...ever. When counting regular season through finals.

MAYBE Shaq. But those guys all had series where they were great, and other series where they were either overshadowed by a teammate, or their team was flat out better regardless if they stepped it up or not.

But in every single series the Mavs were in, the difference maker was Dirk being better than the opponents best player, and Dirk was far and away the best player in each series they were in. He didn't have a Shaq, KG, Ray-Ray, Gasol, or Kobe at his side. His best sidekick was a committee of Shawn Marion, Jason Terry, Jason Kidd, and JJ Barea, none of whom are remotely on par with any of those guys.

It's definitely arguable that the opposing teams #1 player on each squad the Mavs faced, had a better supporting cast than Dirk did. Kobe's Lakers and Wade's Heat both unquestionably had what should have been superior supporting cast help. I'd say the Blazers and Thunder were about on par.

[stretch]

If he comes up short again, people will look back and say he got lucky one year.

Depends. If he goes out there and lays an egg, understandable. If he kicks ass, but loses simply to a better team, that's not neccesarily fair.