Dirk > Bird

[endrity]

Bird's passing more than anything puts him ahead of Dirk.

Plus Bird came into the league as good a compe or as ever, it took Dirk quite a lot of time to really toughen up mentally. Physically he could always take a hit, but mentally he had to adapt to the fact that he was the best player on the floor and act like it. Needles to say, Bird never had much confidence issues. "So, who's playing for second" comes to mind.

[JamStone]

I said PER is the best stat not that it is all we should look at. Which in your opinion is the best stat?

And Yao is as special case, when he was healthy (which was probably like half of his career) he was a pretty dominant player on the offensive end but since he could not stay healthy that's irrelevant.

There's also the fact that Duncan is much much better on the defensive end.

As I suggested already, I don't find value in any single, individual stat. One stat is never enough. Need other stats, facts, factors, context. Even with PER, you still need more context. That's exactly the point I've been making. Even now, you had to clarify and qualify the PER stat with respect to Yao compared to Duncan with more context like Yao's injuries and defense. Just like you would if I told you that based on PER, the difference between Dirk and Manu is a similar difference between Manu and Zach Randolph. You'd offer other variables to give better context as to why you think that's true or not true.


BTW, I thought you had posted "Manu > Dirk," so I'd like for you to post to set the record straight. What do you believe is true, no joking, no trolling?

Dirk > Manu or Manu > Dirk?

[DAF86]

I belive Dirk to be a better basketball player (by not by as much as most people think)

What I said is that Manu's basketball career > Dirk's basketball career

And that Manu > Dirk at complementing Duncan's game

Mavkrew got butthurt and started the whole Manu > Dirk thing.

[JamStone]

I belive Dirk to be a better basketball player (by not by as much as most people think)

What I said is that Manu's basketball career > Dirk's basketball career

And that Manu > Dirk at complementing Duncan's game

Mavkrew got butthurt and started the whole Manu > Dirk thing.

Okay, so we established that even you believe as far as who the better player is, Dirk > Manu.

I'm curious as to whether you still believe the second sentence right now. After a League MVP, a championship, and a Finals MVP now added to Dirk's NBA resume. Even taking into consideration international careers, do you still believe Manu's basketball career > Dirk's basketball career?

You still believe that as of today?

[endrity]

No Jam, he's clearly stated Manu > Dirk, only to backtrack later.

But even his spin, Manu's career > Dirk's career can't stand now can it, when Dirk has achieve the two highest honors possible, MVP and Finals MVP as the lead player of his team.

If Argentina's success is what he wants to rely on, that's fine. Dirk took a bunch of amateurs, no really they play in the second division in Spain, to the Olympics, a 3rd place in the 2002 World Championship and silver in the 2005 Euro Championship, taking MVPs in both those tournaments. Something that players from non winning teams rarely do, so incredible were his performances.

[DAF86]

Yes, I still believe that 6thMoY, all-NBA selections, two all-stars (should have more but never mind), 3 NBA champions (should have won a finals MVP), an Euroleague (MVP) and a Gold medal (MVP) is better than more all-NBA selections, more all-stars, a regular season MVP a finals MVP and a championship.

[DAF86]

No Jam, he's clearly stated Manu > Dirk, only to backtrack later.

There's a bunch of threads to look, find a post where I seriously said Manu > Dirk and link it.

[Sportstudi]

Yes, I still believe that 6thMoY, all-NBA selections, two all-stars (should have more but never mind), 3 NBA champions (should have won a finals MVP), an Euroleague (MVP) and a Gold medal (MVP) is better than more all-NBA selections, more all-stars, a regular season MVP a finals MVP and a championship.

No matter how you spin it, there is NO official MVP for the Olympic tournament. Yes, some media called him the MVP (he was the best player of his team and granted, he played very well), but again, this le does officially NOT exist. Show me the trophy for it. You won't find it as there is none.

And concerning of being a 3-time NBA champion: It's funny how you Spurs fans like to point out that Manu was a green rookie back then in 2003 when you want to point out Duncan's performance. But when this le is needed to boost Manu, you use it in his favor.

All-NBA selections: twice third team.

[DAF86]

No matter how you spin it, there is NO official MVP for the Olympic tournament. Yes, some media called him the MVP (he was the best player of his team and granted, he played very well), but again, this le does officially NOT exist. Show me the trophy for it. You won't find it as there is none.

And concerning of being a 3-time NBA champion: It's funny how you Spurs fans like to point out that Manu was a green rookie back then in 2003 when you want to point out Duncan's performance. But when this le is needed to boost Manu, you use it in his favor.

I don't know if there's a trophy for that, but he got the recognition. It's in every Manu resume you find. And I know there wasn't Olympics MVP in others years but that year the media picked one and luckily for Manu he got it.

[DAF86]

But either way, take that MVP label away if you want I would still take Manu's career over Dirks.

And you're not getting the point, we're not arguing who the better player is, we're arguing who had the better career, who had more happy moments, who celebrated more.

[endrity]

Yes, I still believe that 6thMoY, all-NBA selections, two all-stars (should have more but never mind), 3 NBA champions (should have won a finals MVP), an Euroleague (MVP) and a Gold medal (MVP) is better than more all-NBA selections, more all-stars, a regular season MVP a finals MVP and a championship.

Maybe. But then again, probably not.

11 NBA All-Stars, soon to be 12 All-NBA teams, 4 top 5 MVP finishes with an MVP in there, NBA Finals MVP is clearly a much better career than the one you write about.

You know what's the sad thing. I love, I LOVE, Manu. He's arguably the most physically talented white guard I have seen, an inspiration to everyone who thinks you need to be an uber althetic black kid to succeed as a guard in the NBA. Somehow you are making me belittle his career, which is not at all what I want to do.

[Sportstudi]

I don't know if there's a trophy for that, but he got the recognition. It's in every Manu resume you find. And I know there wasn't Olympics MVP in others years but that year the media picked one and luckily for Manu he got it.

How come I can't find it here? Sorry for ya, but there is NOT such an official award. Some people might have called him the MVP (and as I wrote earlier, he played very well back in 2004), but without being it an official one, I don't think you can add it to the official awards he received (like Euroleague Final Four Most Valuable Player in 2001).

And please don't get me wrong, I have no hate against Manu. I highly respect his accomplishments and hard play. He always plays his guts out and I like and respect that.

[DAF86]

But either way, take that MVP label away if you want I would still take Manu's career over Dirks.

[DAF86]

Maybe. But then again, probably not.

11 NBA All-Stars, soon to be 12 All-NBA teams, 4 top 5 MVP finishes with an MVP in there, NBA Finals MVP is clearly a much better career than the one you write about.

You know what's the sad thing. I love, I LOVE, Manu. He's arguably the most physically talented white guard I have seen, an inspiration to everyone who thinks you need to be an uber althetic black kid to succeed as a guard in the NBA. Somehow you are making me belittle his career, which is not at all what I want to do.

If you want to belittle his career over a guy's opinion on internet be my guess, I don't think Manu would care, tbh.

[endrity]

If you want to belittle his career over a guy's opinion on internet be my guess, I don't think Manu would care, tbh.

yeah ok, cause you know what Dirk was saying when he was singing the rendition of We are the Champions?

"How the do I make Daffie like me, can someone please help me out on this????"






..... or not!

[DAF86]

When have I said Dirk cares about what I think?

It seems to me that the only one here that really cares about what I think is you, sorry if my opinions made you mad it wasn't my intention.

[HarlemHeat37]

As I've said before, I'm not a huge fan of PER, but the majority of the posters here constantly misuse it, tbh..

The problem with PER is the same problem as any other argumentative tool: over-reliance and misinterpretation..

PER is a box score stat..it summarizes the box scores, and systematically compares players across the board..of all box score stats, it's arguably the most effective tool IMO, along with Wins Produced/Win Shares per 48..

PER has it's flaws, but it does a good job of factoring in the performances of teammates, compe ion, etc..it's a vastly superior statistic than any basic box score stat..Jamstone's argument about players having higher PERs in years with inferior teammates is false..

However, I do agree with Jamstone's argument that any one factor should not determine the status of a player, nor should any one factor act as the entire body of a person's argument..

Generally, NBA fans are divided into a couple of groups:

- Advanced stats are all that matters
- Rings and winning is all that matters
- Coaches and players opinions are all that matters

All 3 groups have an abundance if fanatics and extremists..

IMO, the only way to properly conduct an argument is to consider all the factors related to the NBA..

- Accolades
- Level of teammates and compe ion
- Stats
- Watching games

Fortunately, for today's fans, we have a number of tools to form our arguments and learn more about the NBA..Synergy Sports has changed the game IMO, their tools have brought a different, in-depth look at the NBA..


Using "Career PER" is flawed, as I have reiterated many times..PER is set with '15' as the average, but to my knowledge, the performance of the players around you is factored into the number..therefore, while the "average" standard is the same number, every year, the value of each number is actually weighed differently, for every particular season..

The seasonal ranking for each individual player is a more accurate method to use PER as a comparative tool IMO..obviously PER can be used in combination with other advanced stats, as well, to further illustrate the point..

Another advanced stat flaw is using adjusted +/- without combining the individual player's number with the "5-man unit" numbers for his team..it's a more effective usage of the stat..

[endrity]

When have I said Dirk cares about what I think?

It seems to me that the only one here that really cares about what I think is you, sorry if my opinions made you mad it wasn't my intention.

yeah yeah, you really like to backtrack on your own examples don't you?

[endrity]

As I've said before, I'm not a huge fan of PER, but the majority of the posters here constantly misuse it, tbh..

The problem with PER is the same problem as any other argumentative tool: over-reliance and misinterpretation..

PER is a box score stat..it summarizes the box scores, and systematically compares players across the board..of all box score stats, it's arguably the most effective tool IMO, along with Wins Produced/Win Shares per 48..

PER has it's flaws, but it does a good job of factoring in the performances of teammates, compe ion, etc..it's a vastly superior statistic than any basic box score stat..Jamstone's argument about players having higher PERs in years with inferior teammates is false..

However, I do agree with Jamstone's argument that any one factor should not determine the status of a player, nor should any one factor act as the entire body of a person's argument..

Generally, NBA fans are divided into a couple of groups:

- Advanced stats are all that matters
- Rings and winning is all that matters
- Coaches and players opinions are all that matters

All 3 groups have an abundance if fanatics and extremists..

IMO, the only way to properly conduct an argument is to consider all the factors related to the NBA..

- Accolades
- Level of teammates and compe ion
- Stats
- Watching games

Fortunately, for today's fans, we have a number of tools to form our arguments and learn more about the NBA..Synergy Sports has changed the game IMO, their tools have brought a different, in-depth look at the NBA..


Using "Career PER" is flawed, as I have reiterated many times..PER is set with '15' as the average, but to my knowledge, the performance of the players around you is factored into the number..therefore, while the "average" standard is the same number, every year, the value of each number is actually weighed differently, for every particular season..

The seasonal ranking for each individual player is a more accurate method to use PER as a comparative tool IMO..obviously PER can be used in combination with other advanced stats, as well, to further illustrate the point..

Another advanced stat flaw is using adjusted +/- without combining the individual player's number with the "5-man unit" numbers for his team..it's a more effective usage of the stat..

+1! Especially on the box score thing.

As I said earlier, from those bits and pieces we know NBA teams barely use the traditional box score, so you can understand how truly useful a stat that summarizes it really is.

[DAF86]

Whatever man, I'm not getting to you. Have a good night.

[HarlemHeat37]

For example, Dirk Nowitzki's career PER is superior to Larry Bird's, which is the point of this thread..

However, if you look at their respective finishes:

Dirk has 2 top 3 finishes

Bird has 6 top 3 finishes

PER demonstrates that Larry Bird's peak, in comparison to his peers, was vastly superior to Nowitzki's..however, Dirk's longevity has been superior, which is inarguable..

In the playoffs, the discrepancy is even wider..


Dirk finished #1 in the regular season PER in 2006 and 2007..was he the best regular season player in the NBA in those respective years? I don't think he was, but it's certainly arguable..

[JamStone]

As I've said before, I'm not a huge fan of PER, but the majority of the posters here constantly misuse it, tbh..

The problem with PER is the same problem as any other argumentative tool: over-reliance and misinterpretation..

PER is a box score stat..it summarizes the box scores, and systematically compares players across the board..of all box score stats, it's arguably the most effective tool IMO, along with Wins Produced/Win Shares per 48..

PER has it's flaws, but it does a good job of factoring in the performances of teammates, compe ion, etc..it's a vastly superior statistic than any basic box score stat..Jamstone's argument about players having higher PERs in years with inferior teammates is false..

However, I do agree with Jamstone's argument that any one factor should not determine the status of a player, nor should any one factor act as the entire body of a person's argument..

Generally, NBA fans are divided into a couple of groups:

- Advanced stats are all that matters
- Rings and winning is all that matters
- Coaches and players opinions are all that matters

All 3 groups have an abundance if fanatics and extremists..

IMO, the only way to properly conduct an argument is to consider all the factors related to the NBA..

- Accolades
- Level of teammates and compe ion
- Stats
- Watching games

Fortunately, for today's fans, we have a number of tools to form our arguments and learn more about the NBA..Synergy Sports has changed the game IMO, their tools have brought a different, in-depth look at the NBA..


Using "Career PER" is flawed, as I have reiterated many times..PER is set with '15' as the average, but to my knowledge, the performance of the players around you is factored into the number..therefore, while the "average" standard is the same number, every year, the value of each number is actually weighed differently, for every particular season..

The seasonal ranking for each individual player is a more accurate method to use PER as a comparative tool IMO..obviously PER can be used in combination with other advanced stats, as well, to further illustrate the point..

Another advanced stat flaw is using adjusted +/- without combining the individual player's number with the "5-man unit" numbers for his team..it's a more effective usage of the stat..

good post

And my suggestion about having a better PER with inferior teammates was more of a question than anything, since I really did not and still do not know the exact formula and calculations for PER. I was just pointing out that there are certain variables and perhaps other intangible factors it doesn't take into account that could skew what the PER stat by itself might indicate.

[Samuel Eto'o]

the argentinian homers on this site

[DAF86]

Mavsfans on this site are the quickest/easiest to get butthurt, tbh.

[Samuel Eto'o]

is that how it looks over there in argentina