NBA: Dirk or KG?

[FkLA]

But seriously chill out, benefactor. Im just ing with you man, you get angry too easily tbh.

[benefactor]

I'm not mad...and I don't care if you are ing with me or whatever. .

It's simple...stop tagging me in posts. The only reason you would do it is to get my attention and I've told you repeatedly that I don't care. There are literally hundreds of other people on this site you can talk to and bother. Continuing to bother someone who doesn't give a about anything you have to say doesn't make much sense.

This conversation is over. In the nicest, most respectful way I can say it...pretty please...with sugar on top...go tag someone who gives a .

[FkLA]

I dont know, benefactor. This second post was a little more relaxed but your first one had steam coming out of it imho.

Kinda hard to claim you dont care one way or the other when youre not only letting it bother you but posting long rants about it tbh. Personally I would recommend maybe not reading my posts at all, even the ones where I tag you. Maybe put me on ignore? Something to help you deal with it because you dont seem to be doing a good job of it on your own imo.

[RD2191]

[nowhereman523]

Ive explained all this to you before, but Ill do it one last time you little homer:

1. National pundits? Thats one guy. There arent very many others that wouldve taken KG over Dirk in '04 and if they did theyre idiots. KG won the MVP that year, dip .

2. Maybe cause he was on a terrible team? Unless you are dumb enough to believe he went from being a perennial All-NBA player, inexplicably started 'sucking' that one year, then magically returned to being good again. What kind of dumbass argument is this, seriously? Arguments like these are why I say homers are the worst.

3. Great offense beats great defense, doesnt matter who you are. KG not being able to shutdown Dirk is another dumb homer argument. The Mavs destroyed the Wolves because they were the better team. Funny how KG's supporting casts are only taken into account when trying to discredit his le with Boston but conveniently ignored when looking at his poor results in Minny. Homer.

So what I'm seeing is not a single valid reason to take KG over Dirk.

Name another all-time guy that missed even the third all-nba team in his prime when healthy. Even Bean made second team with a far crappier supporting cast.

Blame the cast if you want to. I'm not gonna pick a guy based on hypotheticals when all the data we have says he got crushed by the other dude.

And the reason his supporting cast is taken into account is because he could never, in his career, do crap without 2 or 3 other all-star level guys on his team. Dirk did far more with far less, consistently (yet, somehow, is harder to build around?). This debate was over even before 2011.

[Rogue]

Hablo un poco de Espanol solo, no estoy buen suficiente para traducion.

[ambchang]

First off, let me say that KG is not as good as either Duncan or Shaq. And how exactly do you close when you dont have the ball in your hands? Thats the point, guards handling the rock for elite bigman is not that uncommon.

Also what do you consider a big offensive playoff game? KG was never an explosive scorer but pretty sure he averaged 20-25 ppg for Minny during his time there...most of his teams just sucked tbh.

KG is not as good as either Duncan or Shaq is a given, but Duncan and Shaq had the balls in their hands, they didn't handle the ball, which is true for every single big man in NBA history. Even a guy like Bill Walton didn't bring the ball up the court. Duncan and Shaq finishes plenty, and the stats showed it. Duncan has been finishing at the same rate Ginobili did, and I recalled a stat during Shaq's three peat that his clutch stats were one of the top three in the league, ahead of Kobe.

As for big offensive playoff game, I admit it is subjective, but really other than the phenomenal 32/21 closing game he had against Sacramento, I can't think of one single clutch game from him. For 12 seasons between the 1999-2000 and 10-11 seasons, Garnett played 93 playoff games, and scored over 30 points in only 9 of them. That is 10.7% of the games. This is Garnett's absolute prime years, and spanned his years for the Wolves and Celtics.

During the same stretch, which included years where Dirk was not in his prime, Dirk played 124 playoff games and scored 30 points or more in 42 games, including 6 games of 40+ and 1 game of 50. This means that in 33.9% of his playoff, Dirk had 30+ points, that is a phenomenal percentage. All this talk about Dirk being a choker is pure BS, the dude is clutch, and I have been saying this despite the 06 and 07 playoffs, he just got ganged up.

Admittedly, Im not very familiar with the WS formula. But pretty sure winning games plays a big role in it, no? If so Im assuming it doesnt take into account quality of teammates. Otherwise imo theres no other reason why '03 KG (2nd behind Duncan in MVP voting) was nowhere near '04 KG who ended up winning it. I could probably look all this up to understand it better but Im pretty lazy tbh.

WS measures the supposed impact of a player on the offensive and defensive side to estimate how many games a player was responsible for winning the teams games. Sure it's not an exact science, and there are exceptions, but overall, it provides a very good guidance to which player is better. A player, even a superstar, requires a certain set of teammates to maximize your potential, so naturally quality teammates does help with your WS, but it doesn't mean that having the best teammates will lead to better winshares. Garnett had way better teammates with the Celtics, but the Celtics didn't center their entire offense and defense around him (coupled with the fact that Garnett was older then as well) so his WS was less than those of his Wolves day.

A player with a high WS on a winning team usually translates to a player with the ability to have a winning team constructed around him. So a consistently high WS speaks to a player who is relatively versatile and easy to build around, while a player with wildly fluctuating WS are those who are system based.

Taking Garnett, Dirk, and Duncan as comparisons. During their primes, they have approximate WS ranges of:
Garnett: 11.6 to 18.3, with three fantastic seasons while they had Cassell and Sprewell.
Dirk: 11.5 to 17.7, but he had consistent runs of 13 to 15 in there with many different types of teammates.
Duncan: 10.1 to 17.8, and again, with consistent runs of 13 ws, with no sudden ups and downs. Also note that Duncan plays generally less minutes as part of the Spurs strategy

I tried to put in Shaq, but he didn't play full strength or were injured quite often, so it's really tough to put that in perspective.

[FkLA]

KG is not as good as either Duncan or Shaq is a given, but Duncan and Shaq had the balls in their hands, they didn't handle the ball, which is true for every single big man in NBA history. Even a guy like Bill Walton didn't bring the ball up the court. Duncan and Shaq finishes plenty, and the stats showed it. Duncan has been finishing at the same rate Ginobili did, and I recalled a stat during Shaq's three peat that his clutch stats were one of the top three in the league, ahead of Kobe.

What is closing games to you mean, Amb? Like I said earlier to me its more than just finishing a play set up by Manu/Kobe. Closing would be if they threw the ball into the post and let either guy go to work. Ive watched every playoff game and most regular season games over the past decade and honestly dont remember that being done often. It was probably even less often for Shaq since he was a 50% FT shooter.

As for big offensive playoff game, I admit it is subjective, but really other than the phenomenal 32/21 closing game he had against Sacramento, I can't think of one single clutch game from him. For 12 seasons between the 1999-2000 and 10-11 seasons, Garnett played 93 playoff games, and scored over 30 points in only 9 of them. That is 10.7% of the games. This is Garnett's absolute prime years, and spanned his years for the Wolves and Celtics.

During the same stretch, which included years where Dirk was not in his prime, Dirk played 124 playoff games and scored 30 points or more in 42 games, including 6 games 40+ and 1 game of 50. This means that in 33.9% of his playoff, Dirk had 30+ points, that is a phenomenal percentage. All this talk about Dirk being a choker is pure BS, the dude is clutch, and I have been saying this despite the 06 and 07 playoffs, he just got ganged up.

KG is not as explosive of a scorer, he doesnt have a move thats as unstoppable as Dirks fadeaway. Thats a given. Pretty sure KG eats up Dirk in rebounds, defense and even assists though.

WS measures the supposed impact of a player on the offensive and defensive side to estimate how many games a player was responsible for winning the teams games. Sure it's not an exact science, and there are exceptions, but overall, it provides a very good guidance to which player is better. A player, even a superstar, requires a certain set of teammates to maximize your potential, so naturally quality teammates does help with your WS, but it doesn't mean that having the best teammates will lead to better winshares. Garnett had way better teammates with the Celtics, but the Celtics didn't center their entire offense and defense around him (coupled with the fact that Garnett was older then as well) so his WS was less than those of his Wolves day.

A player with a high WS on a winning team usually translates to a player with the ability to have a winning team constructed around him. So a consistently high WS speaks to a player who is relatively versatile and easy to build around, while a player with wildly fluctuating WS are those who are system based.

Taking Garnett, Dirk, and Duncan as comparisons. During their primes, they have approximate WS ranges of:
Garnett: 11.6 to 18.3, with three fantastic seasons while they had Cassell and Sprewell.
Dirk: 11.5 to 17.7, but he had consistent runs of 13 to 15 in there with many different types of teammates.
Duncan: 10.1 to 17.8, and again, with consistent runs of 13 ws, with no sudden ups and downs. Also note that Duncan plays generally less minutes as part of the Spurs strategy

I tried to put in Shaq, but he didn't play full strength or were injured quite often, so it's really tough to put that in perspective.

Doesnt this also speak volumes about what KG couldve done with good supporting casts? His win shares are significantly higher than both Dirk and Duncans (Im guessing they mightve even been the best in the league for that year). His teammates were consistently bad in Minny except for that one year, and the WS show that. Its dumb to discredit his '08 le because his teammates were so good but completely ignore that his teammates in Minny were equally as bad for the majority of his time there. Its also not truth to say he "needs more talent than Dirk does to win". Did he have more talent than Dirk did during 2011? Sure, but if he had something similar to his '04 squad throughout his time in Minny he couldve won one. He was the best player in the league, his team was the 1st seed and they never truly got a chance because of Cassell's injury. He didnt 'need' two HOFs to help him win him a le like these homers like to claim.

[LkrFan]

_irk plays one side of the court. Give me KG.

[nowhereman523]

_irk plays one side of the court. Give me KG.

so much stupid in your post

[Jodelo]

so much stupid in your post

Still mad that neither Kobe, Gasol or even the Lakers ever won a game against Dirk in the Playoffs!

[irishock]

Amazing how prime Dirk actually finished better than Kobe in advanced defensive stats, yet Kobe gets All-D selections

[LkrFan]

Still mad that neither Kobe, Gasol or even the Lakers ever won a game against Dirk in the Playoffs!

Not even close to being right son. Why would I be mad at a "one and done" player like _irk?

I like 2-way players - always have. _irk is a better offensive player but KG is more complete because he was dominant defensively and would still give you 20-10. That's the difference for me.

[ambchang]

What is closing games to you mean, Amb? Like I said earlier to me its more than just finishing a play set up by Manu/Kobe. Closing would be if they threw the ball into the post and let either guy go to work. Ive watched every playoff game and most regular season games over the past decade and honestly dont remember that being done often. It was probably even less often for Shaq since he was a 50% FT shooter.

Closing means to take a team to a win in a close game by doing what is necessary. Could be offensive, could be defensive. Duncan does both. And I do not agree with how Duncan just finishes, he creates as well working the ball in the low post. How do you explain his assists if he was just catching and flushing.



Not the best video as it was mostly around the Spurs rallying in 2006 vs. the Mavs, and it included a lot of plays that are not last second.
1st play. Bowen got the rebound, outlets to Ginobili, pass to Duncan for a dunk. Not much closing to speak of.
2nd play. Ginobili passes to Duncan, he worked the post, drew the entire Mavs team and still scored with foul.
3rd play. Duncan got ball in the low post, drew a double team to open up the lane, passed the NVE, who drove the lane and passed the ball back to Duncan for the layup and foul.
4th play. Duncan got the ball in the post, backed down the defender and scored.
5th play. Ginobili missed a floater. Duncan rebounded and scored.
6th play. Ginobili threw the entry pass. Duncan put a few moves and scored.
7th play. Ginobili threw an entry pass. Duncan did his work and drew another defender, kicked the ball out to Finley for a three.
8th play. Ginobili threw an entry pass. Duncan did his work and drew another defender, scored with a foul.
9th play. Ginobili threw an entry pass. Duncan drew the double, kicked it back to Ginobili for a wide open 3.

Only one of the plays were created by someone else (Bowen and Ginobili), everything else was a Duncan play, and Ginobili threw the entry pass most of the time. I would say Duncan closed this game.

It's no secret that the Spurs played 4down for the longest time with Duncan taking the ball in the post in both clutch and non-clutch situations. It's the Spurs most reliable play for half a decade with Duncan there to create for himself and his teammates.

As for Shaq, 50% from the FT line is as good as 50% from the FG. That's a pretty good percentage. Hack and Shaq is best used mid game to disrupt the other team's momentum.

[QUOTE=FkLA;6886847]KG is not as explosive of a scorer, he doesnt have a move thats as unstoppable as Dirks fadeaway. Thats a given. Pretty sure KG eats up Dirk in rebounds, defense and even assists though.

Dirk's rebounds and defense is widely underrated. It's obviously not as great as KG's, but I wouldn't say KG eats Dirk up in either of

Doesnt this also speak volumes about what KG couldve done with good supporting casts? His win shares are significantly higher than both Dirk and Duncans (Im guessing they mightve even been the best in the league for that year). His teammates were consistently bad in Minny except for that one year, and the WS show that. Its dumb to discredit his '08 le because his teammates were so good but completely ignore that his teammates in Minny were equally as bad for the majority of his time there. Its also not truth to say he "needs more talent than Dirk does to win". Did he have more talent than Dirk did during 2011? Sure, but if he had something similar to his '04 squad throughout his time in Minny he couldve won one. He was the best player in the league, his team was the 1st seed and they never truly got a chance because of Cassell's injury. He didnt 'need' two HOFs to help him win him a le like these homers like to claim.

No it actually doesn't. KG had ONE season where he had a better WS than Duncan or Dirk. Both Duncan and Dirk had better 2nd best 3rd best, etc ... WS seasons. It speaks to KG being a difficult player to build around/system player.

Dirk carried that 2011 Mavs team offensively, Duncan did it offensively and defensively in 03. KG anchored the defense in 08, but Pierce carried them offensively that year. Garnett is just not good enough offensively to be a #1 option on a championship team, both Duncan and Dirk proved that they were.

[nowhereman523]

Not even close to being right son. Why would I be mad at a "one and done" player like _irk?

I like 2-way players - always have. _irk is a better offensive player but KG is more complete because he was dominant defensively and would still give you 20-10. That's the difference for me.

SO MUCH STUPID IN YOUR POST

[FkLA]

Closing means to take a team to a win in a close game by doing what is necessary. Could be offensive, could be defensive. Duncan does both. And I do not agree with how Duncan just finishes, he creates as well working the ball in the low post. How do you explain his assists if he was just catching and flushing.



Not the best video as it was mostly around the Spurs rallying in 2006 vs. the Mavs, and it included a lot of plays that are not last second.
1st play. Bowen got the rebound, outlets to Ginobili, pass to Duncan for a dunk. Not much closing to speak of.
2nd play. Ginobili passes to Duncan, he worked the post, drew the entire Mavs team and still scored with foul.
3rd play. Duncan got ball in the low post, drew a double team to open up the lane, passed the NVE, who drove the lane and passed the ball back to Duncan for the layup and foul.
4th play. Duncan got the ball in the post, backed down the defender and scored.
5th play. Ginobili missed a floater. Duncan rebounded and scored.
6th play. Ginobili threw the entry pass. Duncan put a few moves and scored.
7th play. Ginobili threw an entry pass. Duncan did his work and drew another defender, kicked the ball out to Finley for a three.
8th play. Ginobili threw an entry pass. Duncan did his work and drew another defender, scored with a foul.
9th play. Ginobili threw an entry pass. Duncan drew the double, kicked it back to Ginobili for a wide open 3.

Only one of the plays were created by someone else (Bowen and Ginobili), everything else was a Duncan play, and Ginobili threw the entry pass most of the time. I would say Duncan closed this game.

It's no secret that the Spurs played 4down for the longest time with Duncan taking the ball in the post in both clutch and non-clutch situations. It's the Spurs most reliable play for half a decade with Duncan there to create for himself and his teammates.

As for Shaq, 50% from the FT line is as good as 50% from the FG. That's a pretty good percentage. Hack and Shaq is best used mid game to disrupt the other team's momentum.

KG did a lot of the same then. Its not like he disappeared during 4th quarters, he did lack a truly unstoppable move (his fadeaway was close but not there) to go to in last second situations though imo. Yall act like he was a jump shooter, he actually had a solid post game and drew plenty of attention away from his (mediocre) teammates--theres a reason he averaged 5+ apg for so many seasons in Minny. He also had the ability to take players off the dribble.

Dirk's rebounds and defense is widely underrated. It's obviously not as great as KG's, but I wouldn't say KG eats Dirk up in either of

KG absolutely eats Dirk up on D. Underrated or not, Dirk is average at best...KG on the other hand is arguably the best defensive PF of all-time. Id also be willing to bet KG has a of alot more 15+ rebound games than Dirk tbh.

No it actually doesn't. KG had ONE season where he had a better WS than Duncan or Dirk. Both Duncan and Dirk had better 2nd best 3rd best, etc ... WS seasons. It speaks to KG being a difficult player to build around/system player.

Dirk carried that 2011 Mavs team offensively, Duncan did it offensively and defensively in 03. KG anchored the defense in 08, but Pierce carried them offensively that year. Garnett is just not good enough offensively to be a #1 option on a championship team, both Duncan and Dirk proved that they were.

No, I know it was just that one season. Thats what I meant to say but didnt phrase it right.

His win shares being higher than anything Duncan or Dirk has ever posted (and Im assuming the best in the league in 2004) absolutely speaks volumes about what he couldve done if he had similar help throughout his time in Minny. Dude is far from a system player. He happened to win alongside two future HOFs just like Bron/Duncan did but that doesnt mean he wasnt good enough to win with something closer to what he had in 2004. That team never had a real chance at continuing their regular season success because of Cassell's injury, KG carried them past the Kings and got two wins against the Lakers playing PG. I dont even like the guy, hes an asshole and all that, but I dont see how anyone can say if he had talent similar to what Dirk/Duncan had that he wouldnt have enjoyed a of alot more success in Minny than what he ended up having.

Pierce didnt "carry" anything btw. KG led the Cs in scoring in the regular season (by like a point) and Pierce led in the postseason (by like a point). At worst it was 1a and 1b. KG was the guy that was 2nd in MVP voting in '08, doesnt really matter who won the FMVP...that was his team. A very talented one, but his nonetheless.

[ambchang]

KG did a lot of the same then. Its not like he disappeared during 4th quarters, he did lack a truly unstoppable move (his fadeaway was close but not there) to go to in last second situations though imo. Yall act like he was a jump shooter, he actually had a solid post game and drew plenty of attention away from his (mediocre) teammates--theres a reason he averaged 5+ apg for so many seasons in Minny. He also had the ability to take players off the dribble.

I am not saying KG is a jump shooter, and I am not saying that he had no offensive game, but compared to a Dirk or a Duncan, he has ways to go especially in the clutch. For example, in KG's most accomplished season (2004), 73% of his shots in the clutch were jump shots, this compared to a Duncan who attempted 43% of his shots in the paint in 2008 (can't find the other season stats). The problem with KG's clutch game isn't that it isn't varied, KG's offensive game is probably more varied than Dirk's, it's just that it's easier to gang up on and defend, similar to what David Robinson's game was during his prime. Dirk has that awkward off foot jump shot that, no matter what you do, cannot be stopped. KG doesn't have a move like that.

KG absolutely eats Dirk up on D. Underrated or not, Dirk is average at best...KG on the other hand is arguably the best defensive PF of all-time. Id also be willing to bet KG has a of alot more 15+ rebound games than Dirk tbh.

I am sure as well, but the problem is finding a defensive anchor is "easier" than finding an offensive anchor. It's just the way it is.

No, I know it was just that one season. Thats what I meant to say but didnt phrase it right.

His win shares being higher than anything Duncan or Dirk has ever posted (and Im assuming the best in the league in 2004) absolutely speaks volumes about what he couldve done if he had similar help throughout his time in Minny. Dude is far from a system player. He happened to win alongside two future HOFs just like Bron/Duncan did but that doesnt mean he wasnt good enough to win with something closer to what he had in 2004. That team never had a real chance at continuing their regular season success because of Cassell's injury, KG carried them past the Kings and got two wins against the Lakers playing PG. I dont even like the guy, hes an asshole and all that, but I dont see how anyone can say if he had talent similar to what Dirk/Duncan had that he wouldnt have enjoyed a of alot more success in Minny than what he ended up having.

That one e season speaks to how KG requires a very specific set of teammates to maximize his skills. He is a system player in the sense that David Robinson was a system player. You can build phenomenal teams around them in the regular season, but comes the playoffs, when teams have the ability to gang up on them and exploit the weakness of the team, they could be shut down. Duncan on the other hand was very versatile and can dominate in multiple different ways. I feel Dirk is the same way as a "system" player, who requires a big to cover for his defensive short-comings, but again, finding a big defensive anchor is easier (and cheaper) to find than a big time offensive player.

Pierce didnt "carry" anything btw. KG led the Cs in scoring in the regular season (by like a point) and Pierce led in the postseason (by like a point). At worst it was 1a and 1b. KG was the guy that was 2nd in MVP voting in '08, doesnt really matter who won the FMVP...that was his team. A very talented one, but his nonetheless.

Perhaps "carry" was too strong a word, but Pierce was responsible for more of the Boston's offense. In the 2008 season, he scored 1570 points and had 363 assists, given that some of those assists are three pointers, I have used the Boston team ratio to approximate the points scored off of those assists, and the total points generated by Pierce for the season was 3167 points (38.4% of Boston's offense) vs. 2410 (29%) by Garnett.

In the playoffs, those numbers became 1175 points (42%) and 1016 points (37%).

Pierce was most definitely more responsible for Boston's points, and by a noticeable margin at that.

[FkLA]

I am not saying KG is a jump shooter, and I am not saying that he had no offensive game, but compared to a Dirk or a Duncan, he has ways to go especially in the clutch. For example, in KG's most accomplished season (2004), 73% of his shots in the clutch were jump shots, this compared to a Duncan who attempted 43% of his shots in the paint in 2008 (can't find the other season stats). The problem with KG's clutch game isn't that it isn't varied, KG's offensive game is probably more varied than Dirk's, it's just that it's easier to gang up on and defend, similar to what David Robinson's game was during his prime. Dirk has that awkward off foot jump shot that, no matter what you do, cannot be stopped. KG doesn't have a move like that.

Of course hes going to have a higher jumpshot percentage, just like Im sure a good three point shooter has a higher three point percentage than KG. Duncan has a better post game, KG had more range on his jumpshot and could handle the rock on the perimeter--it makes sense and doesnt really tell me much.

I am sure as well, but the problem is finding a defensive anchor is "easier" than finding an offensive anchor. It's just the way it is.

Sure, its a lot easier to get ahold of a Chandler than it is a Dirk. But KG isnt a Chandler, hes a Chandler+ that also happens to give you 20-25 ppg on the other end. Now those are hard to find.

That one e season speaks to how KG requires a very specific set of teammates to maximize his skills. He is a system player in the sense that David Robinson was a system player. You can build phenomenal teams around them in the regular season, but comes the playoffs, when teams have the ability to gang up on them and exploit the weakness of the team, they could be shut down. Duncan on the other hand was very versatile and can dominate in multiple different ways. I feel Dirk is the same way as a "system" player, who requires a big to cover for his defensive short-comings, but again, finding a big defensive anchor is easier (and cheaper) to find than a big time offensive player.

Other than '04, when were KGs teams ever favored to do anything in the postseason? They were 8th seeds/lower seeds the majority of his time there. The little success they did have was for the most part thanks to him, the shortcomings were despite his dominance. The dude literally never had a phenomenal team that faltered in the playoffs because of his shortcomings...KG put up his numbers and his lower seeded teams lost to teams that were simply better.

Some people like to act like he absolutely needs two HOFs to win. Im saying that is far from fact. There is a big gap between what he had in Minny and what he had in Boston, I think he couldve enjoyed success with a supporting cast that was somewhere in between that gap. His '04 team is a great example.

Perhaps "carry" was too strong a word, but Pierce was responsible for more of the Boston's offense. In the 2008 season, he scored 1570 points and had 363 assists, given that some of those assists are three pointers, I have used the Boston team ratio to approximate the points scored off of those assists, and the total points generated by Pierce for the season was 3167 points (38.4% of Boston's offense) vs. 2410 (29%) by Garnett.

In the playoffs, those numbers became 1175 points (42%) and 1016 points (37%).

Pierce was most definitely more responsible for Boston's points, and by a noticeable margin at that.

Well, Pierce plays in the perimeter and handles the rock a lot more man. Of course he'll have more assists. I still maintain that at worst it was 1a and 1b, and that taking into account overall impact it was KGs team tbh.

[Deuce Bigalow]

"I suppose an argument could be made for Pau" .....

[Katherine Robinson]

Do we rank Dirk and KG above Malone?

[Leetonidas]

Do we rank Dirk and KG above Malone?

I would tbh. Malone and KG are good comparisons because they both have a reputation of choking in the biggest moments but KG was one of the best defenders of all-time and impacted the game more than Malone imo, plus he has a ring which is always going to be a stain on Malone's legacy. However, what Dirk did in 2011 is far more impressive than anything Malone/Garnett did in their entire careers imo and that puts him above them. It's not like he was garbage leading up to that season either. He was not an inept defensive player like some made him out to be and he was a great rebounder especially in the playoffs. But his offensive game at his size was completely unguardable and when he was on he was impossible to stop by any player. I value two-way players very much when looking at comparisons but when a player is so dominant on offense and at least an average defender that is hard to pick against. Dirk's clutch play is legendary. Plus a big man being able to shoot free throws at such a high percentage is also a plus.

imo it's

1. Duncan
2. Dirk
3. Garnett
4. Malone

[diego]

I am sure as well, but the problem is finding a defensive anchor is "easier" than finding an offensive anchor. It's just the way it is.

Ive already been laughed off for arguing this (from the same topic) but Ill ask it again. Where are the cheap easy to find defensive anchors? Cuban was able to find and keep one for all of one of dirk's 15 years in the league. Doesnt seem cheap or easy to me. If they are so cheap and easy to find, then why are 25 teams desperate to find one? Duncan, KG, Chandler, Howard, Noah, Bogut, Asik, Gasol, Hibbert, who am I missing, Lebron? Larry sanders ? What are their average salaries? If you are going to consider trash like shawn bradley/dampier a defensive anchor equivalent to a KG, then why shouldnt I do the same with lamarcus aldridge or a monta ellis' offense and make it equivalent to dirk's? Bottom line is that good bigs are extremely rare these days, and I would say especially defensive bigs. much easier to find aldridge/lee/griffin types who love to score but suck on D. of the guys I listed, NONE are comparable to prime Duncan / KG.

And like FkLA said, KG is not just a defensive anchor. He also has a good offensive game, good enough to carry a bad team through the season / be a 2nd-3rd option for a championship team. half of the guys that I listed are either good all around players (gasol / howard / hibbert / bogut) or straight up HOF legends (duncan, KG, lebron). The cheapest of all of them is sanders and I think he is clearly a step below the others; then Asik at 8M per. all the rest are 12-14M+ per year. I just dont get this theory of GOOD defensive bigs being cheap and easy. I think nowadays its much easier to find wings that can score pretty damn well, though obviously not with dirk's 7ft advantage.

[Katherine Robinson]

I would tbh. Malone and KG are good comparisons because they both have a reputation of choking in the biggest moments but KG was one of the best defenders of all-time and impacted the game more than Malone imo, plus he has a ring which is always going to be a stain on Malone's legacy. However, what Dirk did in 2011 is far more impressive than anything Malone/Garnett did in their entire careers imo and that puts him above them. It's not like he was garbage leading up to that season either. He was not an inept defensive player like some made him out to be and he was a great rebounder especially in the playoffs. But his offensive game at his size was completely unguardable and when he was on he was impossible to stop by any player. I value two-way players very much when looking at comparisons but when a player is so dominant on offense and at least an average defender that is hard to pick against. Dirk's clutch play is legendary. Plus a big man being able to shoot free throws at such a high percentage is also a plus.

imo it's

1. Duncan
2. Dirk
3. Garnett
4. Malone

Solid take, I wonder what the Jazz nation sees in Malone - he was Stockton's puppet.

[nowhereman523]

Ive already been laughed off for arguing this (from the same topic) but Ill ask it again. Where are the cheap easy to find defensive anchors? Cuban was able to find and keep one for all of one of dirk's 15 years in the league. Doesnt seem cheap or easy to me. If they are so cheap and easy to find, then why are 25 teams desperate to find one? Duncan, KG, Chandler, Howard, Noah, Bogut, Asik, Gasol, Hibbert, who am I missing, Lebron? Larry sanders ? What are their average salaries? If you are going to consider trash like shawn bradley/dampier a defensive anchor equivalent to a KG, then why shouldnt I do the same with lamarcus aldridge or a monta ellis' offense and make it equivalent to dirk's? Bottom line is that good bigs are extremely rare these days, and I would say especially defensive bigs. much easier to find aldridge/lee/griffin types who love to score but suck on D. of the guys I listed, NONE are comparable to prime Duncan / KG.

And like FkLA said, KG is not just a defensive anchor. He also has a good offensive game, good enough to carry a bad team through the season / be a 2nd-3rd option for a championship team. half of the guys that I listed are either good all around players (gasol / howard / hibbert / bogut) or straight up HOF legends (duncan, KG, lebron). The cheapest of all of them is sanders and I think he is clearly a step below the others; then Asik at 8M per. all the rest are 12-14M+ per year. I just dont get this theory of GOOD defensive bigs being cheap and easy. I think nowadays its much easier to find wings that can score pretty damn well, though obviously not with dirk's 7ft advantage.

Your point is taken, but look at the relative availability - if at any specific moment in the league's history you were to make a list of players good enough to be the best defensive player on a championship team and players good enough to be the best offensive player on a championship, the first list is almost certainly longer.

[Phillip]

If you are going to consider trash like shawn bradley/dampier a defensive anchor equivalent to a KG, then why shouldnt I do the same with lamarcus aldridge or a monta ellis' offense and make it equivalent to dirk's?

Because Lamarcus Aldridge and Monta Ellis didn't take a team with interior anchors like Marcus Camby, Biedrins, or Larry Sanders anywhere close to the finals. Dirk actually took inferior talents than the aforementioned in Erick Dampier and Desagana Diop to the Finals and nearly won it.

Cuban was able to find and keep one for all of one of dirk's 15 years in the league.

please tell me this is a joke.