Reply With Quote
Coming through in the clutch?
Shooting 41% from the field?
Coming through in the clutch?
Or if Patrick could have shot better than 36% in the Finals.
Considering he was being doubled non-stop, dealing with a flu for a couple games, and the fact that even on the two nights he didn't shoot well, he came through big in the 4th quarter, I'd say that stat is pretty meaningless.
Even MJ had various series' where he shot as bad, or worse, but ultimately he still came through consistently when the team needed him most, which is what most people will remember, aside from his haters. Similarly, Dirk had a series where his % was not particularly high, but most people remember how big he came through for them in clutch situations, aside from haters like yourself.
Lol I had to laugh because that totally reads like a post a Laker fan would use defending Kobe's shooting percentage. Not saying it's not true or legitimate, just was amusing to me.
2 or 1? Hakeem and Dirk don't have the same number of les.
Dirk was missing the same kind of shots he made all of last season.
the prime KG was the best of 'em all, having an overall rating of 99 in video games
and?
You mean to tell me that none of the great players in NBA history has missed shots in the NBA Finals that they normally make?
hm, okay.
Good post and agree 100%. These types of arguments can be fun every once and awhile, but now most of us are at the point where we've said our views on the matter.
And you were putting excuses as to why he shot 41%, he was taking the same kind of shots he took during the whole playoffs he was just missing them, and there's no problem with that (specially since they won the series) but don't put excuses.
Jam's on point that this looks like a Kobe apologist argument, but Dirk's shooting in the series was heavily skewed by game 4 when he was sick and the first half of game 6. So no, it wasn't consistently bad. Without those two moments he's close to 50%.
But in the end he made every single big play in games 2,3,4 and almost all in 5. And that's all that matters.
Game 1: 7-18
Game 2: 10-22
Game 3: 11-21
Game 4: 6-19
Game 5: 9-18
Game 6: 9-27
Two points on Dirk v. DRob or Karl Malone or Chuck or KG.
Dirk has won three playoff series he had no business winning, 06 Spurs, 11 Lakers, 11 Heat. Two of them agains the reigning champions, the other against two players that were being labeled as the best in the game. All three series without HC, in all three Dirk coming out as arguably the best player on the floor (though 06 Duncan was right there as well). The other guys in the list don't come close to doing that. Why? Look below.
Second, on the idea of offense v. all around-ness. People have a hard time understanding how an NBA roster is built nowadays and go on with this MYTH of players having to do everything. The point is that when you pay a superstar $20mil a year he needs to be your closer, the best offensive player on the court. If he does that, than you can go and get yourself a Bruce Bowen or Ben Wallace for 5 mil. Because at the end of the day you are not asking your star to consume himself defending. The point of Dirk not being a great defender is irrelevant if he's not the one actually doing the defending on the other team's main threat.
However, if your 20 mil guy can't dominate, if he is a KG, than the issue of building a roster gets more complicated. Now you need more than a Bruce Bowen, you need someone who can get you some points as well. But that guy will cost more, he'll cost 8 mil. And so with the cap you quickly run out of space and flexibility because you're spending extra money to cover for the holes in your superstar's game.
It's not accidental that KG needed two All Stars to win a ring, while Dirk went twice to the finals without another one by his side or that even with the ty rosters in 08-2010 he never missed the playoffs in a more compe ive West than the one KG had to deal with when he couldn't make the playoffs. Once your star dominates offensively it's easy for the other players to fill in the rest of the holes. If he can't do that, than the others have to overextend.
If this was MLS, or European soccer, where there was no limit to how much a team can spend then maybe Dirk isn't as valuable a commodity. Teams will spend whatever they need. But when optimizing your resources is key, Dirk as a foundation is much better to have than a KG or DRob, jack of all trades master of none types who can not do the one thing that the 20 mil guy is supposed to do, i.e score the last basket.
Last edited by endrity; 02-13-2012 at 07:22 PM.
Seems like I am right, just a couple of shots below 50%. And ofcourse it was very convenient of you to use FG% instead of TS%, which where Dirk's shooting dominance can be seen clearly.
All of this ofcourse with an injured left hand. In fact what is crazy about his Finals was how much more he had to overcome. Not only were Butler and Roddy out, but then Haywood gets injured in Game 1 and and Mahinmi has to play serious minutes. Peja is completely unable to do anything in the series, and the team has to rely on Brian fricking Cardinal in the NBA Finals. Then he injures his hand, then he gets sick, than he has to overcome the deficit in game 2, than he has to finally defeat his demons after an awful start in game 6.
It was almost like destiny required Dirk to win in the most difficult possible way against a team widely picked to run over the Mavs. Only by doing that could he prove once and for all that he truly was a legendary player, that his stats were the real story all those years, not the myth that people created.
Endrity, I get what you are saying ^^ above, but where I somewhat disagree with that is when you are comparing someone who is way above average in an area (Dirk is a greater offensive player, but David is still elite there) compared to most and then on the other side of the coin one is a elite while the other is sub par (Robinson was a legit defensive anchor while Dirk isn't even in the discussion) that is where it becomes cloudy to me. If you are talking about one vs the other in terms of dominant (say Ben Wallace defense vs Dirk offense) it's a no brainer that you go with a guy like Dirk. But when it's not a case of weak/strong vs weak/strong but really strong/elite vs elite/sub par it gets tougher.
Well, since the comment you quoted said 41% from the field I thought that was what we were arguing.
And don't divert, we're talking Dirk's finals shooting %, Dallas won the ship and Dirk won finals MVP (rightly so) but that's not what we're arguing here.
P/S: If we take away all the shots he missed, he has a 100 shooting % during the finals
But the point is that DRob was never the best offensive player in a series. Hakeem was, Duncan was, not DRob. Once the other stars matches your star's production or surpasses it as was the case with Hakeem than you are asking your other guys to make up the difference. And that is of course hard to do. Those guys are there to hit a timely 3, get a rebound, and play defense. If they extend themselves their weaknesses will be shown.
It's not by chance that the Spurs won the 03 championship when Duncan was >>>>> than both Kobe and Shaq. Once he matched those guys, than SJax, Ginobili, Parker and Claxton simply had to play their game. That was it.
You clearly missed my point, and I said that it does look like I am being a bit of an apologist.Well, since the comment you quoted said 41% from the field I thought that was what we're arguing.
And don't divert, we're talking Dirk's finals shooting %, Dallas won the ship and Dirk won finals MVP (rightly so) but that's not what we're arguing here.
P/S: If we take away all the shots he missed, he has a 100 shooting % during the finals
But, the fact is Dirk didn't have a consistently bad shooting series. He was quite good throughout the majority of it. If anything is going to look like a statistical outlier is a game where he was sick (seriously, are you not going to give a guy that?) and a bad first half in game 6. 6 quarters of an anomaly, almost 50% shooting in the other 18. You decide what is more representative of his true performance.
Why is the first half of game six an anomaly?
BTW, lol at 7-18 beign a couple of shots under 50%. 7-18 is 38%.
You really don't know the concept of a statistical outlier do you?
Here's how you look at it. Student A takes 5 exams, and aces the first four and then fails the last one. He gets B- as an overall grade. Student B takes the same 5 exams, and scores B, B+, B-, B-, C+ for an average of B- as well.
At the end of the course A and B come to you and ask for a chance to improve their grade, claiming that this and that prevented them from truly achieving the grade they deserved. If you are the prof, who do you really grant that chance to? Well A of course, he had done so well otherwise except for one grade that is completely out of line with the others. B? Yeah, he seems like he's more or less the same student throughout.
Dirk shot 1 for 12 in the first half of game 6 and then 8-15 in the second. It's clear which one was more in line with the rest of his performance throughout the series.
In all of those 4 games you clown, he's only 5 shots below 50%. In all the 4 games I mentioned. I did not single out game 3 either, where he's above 50%. And btw, since you want to discus stats, you do realise that 7-18 is only two made shots away from 50%?
Dirk in 12 NBA finals games has a shooting% of 40. It's not like he played two or three.
Two made shots(/two less misses) is a big difference (from 50 to 38%). And I don't care for your nitpicking, Dirk shot 41% from the field in the finals, that's the fact and like I said: there's nothing wrong with that, he won the championship so it's all good.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions