Spurs: The chain of alphas in league history

[FkLA]

Are we looking at alphas in series now? Sorry, I thought we have been talking about periods. My bads.

Who was the alpha for minutes 16 to 19 in Game 4 of that series?

Don't be purposely obtuse. You brought up 'Dirk beating Duncan' to support your argument that he was better from 06-08. I'm simply showing you that Duncan was the best player on the floor during that series (and the 06-08 period). The fact that the Mavs won doesn't change that.

[FkLA]

Rings are team accomplishments.

I will never put Billups as the alpha in 04, nor will I put Kawhi as the alpha in 14.

Yeah, because the impact those two had on those le winning teams is even comparable to the impact Timmy had on the 05/07 teams.

[100%duncan]

lmao @ duncan being an alpha, in op and his fantasy takes.

Lol at kobe being an alpha to any championship team. Needing a big man to hold his hand or he was nothing but a tmac who missed the playoffs


Lakers
Kobrick
Nothing without daddy and pau

[Monostradamus]

ambchang went fishing for kobe fans but instead hooked a few dirk haters.

[100%duncan]

I love dirk tbh. My fave non spur alongbwith bron.

[ambchang]

Here take a look for yourself at how the rest of the guys outside of Duncan/Dirk performed.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/..._2006_WCS.html

What was I supposed to infer from this? Seriously, I am not too clear on what point you are trying to make.

Do people even use WS anymore? I'd rather just settle the discussion by looking at the fact that one was the best post player in the league+arguably the best defensive anchor and the other wasn't.

WS really never was an overly popular metric, mostly due to how difficult it is to understand. That doesn't undermine how effective it is to evaluate a player's value to a team though.

Besides, Dirk was an MVP during that time.

Yeah, teams normally hound first options. True alphas perform regardless.

Untrue. Duncan didn't perform that well in 04 vs. the Lakers, ditto 05 vs. the Pistons. He did as well as any one could in 05 considering he was guarded by the Wallace brothers, but he didn't really perform regardless.

He was past his prime so why does it matter? Do you not realize how dumb it is to bring it up to defend an 'alpha' that faltered horribly during his prime? Give me an example of another one of your alphas faltering like that during their prime then you'd have a point.

Jordan vs. the Sonics in 96
Hakeem vs. the Sonics in 96 as well
Wilt on multiple occasions
Lebron in 11 vs. the Mavs
Shaq vs. the Spurs in either 01 or 02 (don't remember exactly, but he struggled)

Don't be purposely obtuse. You brought up 'Dirk beating Duncan' to support your argument that he was better from 06-08. I'm simply showing you that Duncan was the best player on the floor during that series (and the 06-08 period). The fact that the Mavs won doesn't change that.

You brought up taking him in a game, Dirk dominated in Game 7 of that series, scoring the and 1 to take the game to OT, then taking over in OT. At the very least, Dirk played Duncan to a tie in that game.

Yeah, because the impact those two had on those le winning teams is even comparable to the impact Timmy had on the 05/07 teams.

You don't think they did? The entire Pistons offense was built around Billups. The Spurs were much more reliant on Kawhi than people give him credit for. Sure it wasn't Timmy level important, but Kawhi was the best player on the Spurs last year.

[ambchang]

Lebron easily.

Not in 06 and 07, I can see 08, but I'd take Dirk over Lebron in 06 and 07 easily.

[DMC]

Why did the "alpha" have a 182-228 record (2-9 in the postseason) without MVPippen holding his hand?

I'm not going to get into MJ's legacy. My point is that you're riding someone else's schtick.

The forums suffer for a few reasons:

1. Unoriginal takes: This is the premier reason this forum suffers. You have a few guys who explore the space, and everyone else just walk behind them mindlessly repeating the same . No one wants to read Bill Simmons as interpreted by Scoop Jackson. You have a few Bill Simmons types here but mostly Scoop Jacksons. Don't be a Scoop Jackson, be a Bill Simmons (or someone of that caliber).

2. Unoriginal alternate accounts: It's a fact that Mouse and the troll forum regulars have almost every conceivable name from showbiz and literature in the past 50 years already reserved but some of you have alt names that are interesting choices, could be used well, but you just drum right along with the same uninteresting you do from your primary accounts. It makes the concept moot.

3. Overplaying a losing hand: This is when a schtick doesn't work (Like the Stevie Johnson troll) yet the user half heartedly uses it to troll and still posts as if he's too lazy to switch back to his primary account.

4. Poor basketball ac en: This is the majority of the forum, which is fine if you're here to learn, but many of you (Philo, for example) will argue until you're blue in the face that high assists for a player means they are moving the ball well. You have a superficial level understanding of the game; to you more points for player A means player A is better. You occasionally scratch your head as to why the rest of the team doesn't pitch in, why this guy has to do all the work. You make heros of ball hogs. You and your ilk are why the NBA is full of hyped up chuckers masquerading as superstar players..the Melo's, Westbrooks and Kobes of the league. You're often called "player fans" but there are some player fans who understand the game, they just prefer to follow specific players.

5. Last but not least, turncoats and bandwagonners:This forum has those as well. Some of these guys who appear to have switched sides are using it as a troll, but some will actually switch sides every few years so they can argue from a winning platform. It's hard to argue basketball as a player fan when your player is under a mound of . You guys are the reason socialism doesn't work, you won't pull your weight. You take from the funds but you never donate. You are the *******s of the forum. You have no backbones and no honor, it's a video game to you.


I hope some of this at least points you in the right direction. It doesn't matter what MJ did or didn't do. What matters is that you are just parroting someone you think gets e-cred for saying it.

[ElNono]

I used to have little respect for Dirk, but after that le run, you just gotta tip your hat and recognize. The talent was always there, the question always was about the mental for ude to climb the mountain. Once he did it, you can't put that against him.

[DAF86]

Not in 06 and 07, I can see 08, but I'd take Dirk over Lebron in 06 and 07 easily.

The ? on '06 Lebron was already averaging 31.4ppg on 48% shooting, 6.6 apg, 7 rpg, 1.6 stls and 1 bpg all while being one of the best defenders on the league. I don't know if he was already the best player in the World by that time but he was definitely better than Nowitzki.

[djohn2oo8]

I'm not going to get into MJ's legacy. My point is that you're riding someone else's schtick.

The forums suffer for a few reasons:

1. Unoriginal takes: This is the premier reason this forum suffers. You have a few guys who explore the space, and everyone else just walk behind them mindlessly repeating the same . No one wants to read Bill Simmons as interpreted by Scoop Jackson. You have a few Bill Simmons types here but mostly Scoop Jacksons. Don't be a Scoop Jackson, be a Bill Simmons (or someone of that caliber).

2. Unoriginal alternate accounts: It's a fact that Mouse and the troll forum regulars have almost every conceivable name from showbiz and literature in the past 50 years already reserved but some of you have alt names that are interesting choices, could be used well, but you just drum right along with the same uninteresting you do from your primary accounts. It makes the concept moot.

3. Overplaying a losing hand: This is when a schtick doesn't work (Like the Stevie Johnson troll) yet the user half heartedly uses it to troll and still posts as if he's too lazy to switch back to his primary account.

4. Poor basketball ac en: This is the majority of the forum, which is fine if you're here to learn, but many of you (Philo, for example) will argue until you're blue in the face that high assists for a player means they are moving the ball well. You have a superficial level understanding of the game; to you more points for player A means player A is better. You occasionally scratch your head as to why the rest of the team doesn't pitch in, why this guy has to do all the work. You make heros of ball hogs. You and your ilk are why the NBA is full of hyped up chuckers masquerading as superstar players..the Melo's, Westbrooks and Kobes of the league. You're often called "player fans" but there are some player fans who understand the game, they just prefer to follow specific players.

5. Last but not least, turncoats and bandwagonners:This forum has those as well. Some of these guys who appear to have switched sides are using it as a troll, but some will actually switch sides every few years so they can argue from a winning platform. It's hard to argue basketball as a player fan when your player is under a mound of . You guys are the reason socialism doesn't work, you won't pull your weight. You take from the funds but you never donate. You are the *******s of the forum. You have no backbones and no honor, it's a video game to you.


I hope some of this at least points you in the right direction. It doesn't matter what MJ did or didn't do. What matters is that you are just parroting someone you think gets e-cred for saying it.

[FkLA]

What was I supposed to infer from this? Seriously, I am not too clear on what point you are trying to make.

The Spurs were so supposedly so much more loaded than Dallas that year, yet the guys outside of Dirk/TD swung the series in favor of Dallas. How does that make sense to you?

WS really never was an overly popular metric, mostly due to how difficult it is to understand. That doesn't undermine how effective it is to evaluate a player's value to a team though.

Besides, Dirk was an MVP during that time.

So you'd take Dirk over the best post player+best defensive anchor bc of WS?

Nash won two MVPs during that same time.

Untrue. Duncan didn't perform that well in 04 vs. the Lakers, ditto 05 vs. the Pistons. He did as well as any one could in 05 considering he was guarded by the Wallace brothers, but he didn't really perform regardless.

There's a difference between having to work hard for your points and getting bullied. 2011 Dirk for example only shot 41% vs Miami but I wouldn't say he got bullied like '07 Dirk did. That was a monumental chokejob by your alpha no matter how much you try to attribute it to 'matchups'.

Jordan vs. the Sonics in 96
Hakeem vs. the Sonics in 96 as well
Wilt on multiple occasions
Lebron in 11 vs. the Mavs
Shaq vs. the Spurs in either 01 or 02 (don't remember exactly, but he struggled)

Again those guys weren't bullied except '11 LeBron. He straight up choked just like Dirk did in '07. Only difference is there was no player that was the same caliber as '07 TD that you could make an argument for as being better than Bron, Dirk was the closest one probably and only during the playoffs.

You brought up taking him in a game, Dirk dominated in Game 7 of that series, scoring the and 1 to take the game to OT, then taking over in OT. At the very least, Dirk played Duncan to a tie in that game.

If we ignore defense, at most he played him to a tie.

You don't think they did? The entire Pistons offense was built around Billups. The Spurs were much more reliant on Kawhi than people give him credit for. Sure it wasn't Timmy level important, but Kawhi was the best player on the Spurs last year.

Do you think so? I'm not saying they weren't important to their teams but they also weren't in their prime Top 5 players of all-time like TD was in 05/07.

[ambchang]

The ? on '06 Lebron was already averaging 31.4ppg on 48% shooting, 6.6 apg, 7 rpg, 1.6 stls and 1 bpg all while being one of the best defenders on the league. I don't know if he was already the best player in the World by that time but he was definitely better than Nowitzki.

Lebron put up great stats, but it's not like Dirk was incomparable. Dirk was putting up 26.6 on 48% (41% on threes), 9 rebounds and 3 assists. But Dirk was dominating the league at that point. he was leading the Mavs to new heights, contending in the rough western conference with an iffy supporting cast.

[FkLA]

Gotta love the hyperbole. A Finals loss followed by two first round exits equals 'new heights'.

[ambchang]

The Spurs were so supposedly so much more loaded than Dallas that year, yet the guys outside of Dirk/TD swung the series in favor of Dallas. How does that make sense to you?

See Mavs vs. Heat, 2011.

So you'd take Dirk over the best post player+best defensive anchor bc of WS?

For a single game that season? Yes. Tough tough yes, but yes.

Nash won two MVPs during that same time.

Duncan won zero.

There's a difference between having to work hard for your points and getting bullied. 2011 Dirk for example only shot 41% vs Miami but I wouldn't say he got bullied like '07 Dirk did. That was a monumental chokejob by your alpha no matter how much you try to attribute it to 'matchups'.

What is that difference? How do you define it?

Again those guys weren't bullied except '11 LeBron. He straight up choked just like Dirk did in '07. Only difference is there was no player that was the same caliber as '07 TD that you could make an argument for as being better than Bron, Dirk was the closest one probably and only during the playoffs.

So one series against a team that was specifically created to stop Dirk undid three years' worth of work by Dirk.

If we ignore defense, at most he played him to a tie.

And yet Dirk took the Mavs to OT with that and-1.

Do you think so? I'm not saying they weren't important to their teams but they also weren't in their prime Top 5 players of all-time like TD was in 05/07.

Billups was every bit as important to the Pistons in 04 as Duncan was to the Spurs in 07.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Certainly was, but Dirk played Duncan to a standstill, and his regular season work was just better (Duncan was having his minutes monitored and such)



Winning a ring is a team accomplishment, Dirk won an MVP during that time. As for the GS series, they match up with Dirk perfectly, and the rest of the Mavs didn't step up. It's like saying Duncan choked vs. the Grizzlies in the 8 series.

The entire point of being alpha is you are the best and are a mismatch in any matchup.

Lakers in early 2000s had Kobe Shaq Horry and a bunch of scrubs. Samaki Walker and Rick Fx.

[elbamba]

Duncan dominated as late as 07-08 with almost 19/11/3/2 pts/rb/ass/bl.

Playoffs that year were pretty good as well going to the WCF at 20/14.5/3/2.

In sum Duncan was arguably the best player in the league from 2003-2008. You could add as early as 2001 but the Spurs teams were not as good as LA teams in 01 and 02.

[FkLA]

See Mavs vs. Heat, 2011.

First off, the Spurs weren't stacked to that extent (the Heat's three max players were in their prime). Second, the Heat's best player choked hard that year. The Spurs best player in '06 (Duncan) didn't. Not sure why you keep making dumb comparisons.

For a single game that season? Yes. Tough tough yes, but yes.

Hope you're proud to be in the 1% that would make that choice.

Duncan won zero.

So Nash>Dirk>Duncan? Let's give the mid 00s slot to Nash then if you want to bring up MVPs.

What is that difference? How do you define it?

Well none of them shot in the mid 30s for one. Then there's the compe ion, you bring up how alphas fared against great teams/defenses to justify how Dirk fared against an 8th seed Nelly squad. There's bounce back games, Dirk pretty much bent over and spread his cheeks all series. The end result, most of the guys you listed won those series.

So one series against a team that was specifically created to stop Dirk undid three years' worth of work by Dirk.

Well, that and the fact that he had another first round exit the following year and came up short in the Finals the previous year. Or to summarize he didn't win during the time you claim he was the alpha of the league...isn't that an oxymoron?

And yet Dirk took the Mavs to OT with that and-1.

So that play gives him the nod even though Duncan scored more points and was asked to anchor a defense?

Billups was every bit as important to the Pistons in 04 as Duncan was to the Spurs in 07.

smh wow

'04 Billups: 16.4 ppg, 5.9 apg, 3.0 rpg on 39% shooting
'07 Duncan: 22.2 ppg, 11.5 rpg, 3.3 apg, 3.1 bpg on 52% shooting

[Brazil]

I'm not going to get into MJ's legacy. My point is that you're riding someone else's schtick.

The forums suffer for a few reasons:

1. Unoriginal takes: This is the premier reason this forum suffers. You have a few guys who explore the space, and everyone else just walk behind them mindlessly repeating the same . No one wants to read Bill Simmons as interpreted by Scoop Jackson. You have a few Bill Simmons types here but mostly Scoop Jacksons. Don't be a Scoop Jackson, be a Bill Simmons (or someone of that caliber).

2. Unoriginal alternate accounts: It's a fact that Mouse and the troll forum regulars have almost every conceivable name from showbiz and literature in the past 50 years already reserved but some of you have alt names that are interesting choices, could be used well, but you just drum right along with the same uninteresting you do from your primary accounts. It makes the concept moot.

3. Overplaying a losing hand: This is when a schtick doesn't work (Like the Stevie Johnson troll) yet the user half heartedly uses it to troll and still posts as if he's too lazy to switch back to his primary account.

4. Poor basketball ac en: This is the majority of the forum, which is fine if you're here to learn, but many of you (Philo, for example) will argue until you're blue in the face that high assists for a player means they are moving the ball well. You have a superficial level understanding of the game; to you more points for player A means player A is better. You occasionally scratch your head as to why the rest of the team doesn't pitch in, why this guy has to do all the work. You make heros of ball hogs. You and your ilk are why the NBA is full of hyped up chuckers masquerading as superstar players..the Melo's, Westbrooks and Kobes of the league. You're often called "player fans" but there are some player fans who understand the game, they just prefer to follow specific players.

5. Last but not least, turncoats and bandwagonners:This forum has those as well. Some of these guys who appear to have switched sides are using it as a troll, but some will actually switch sides every few years so they can argue from a winning platform. It's hard to argue basketball as a player fan when your player is under a mound of . You guys are the reason socialism doesn't work, you won't pull your weight. You take from the funds but you never donate. You are the *******s of the forum. You have no backbones and no honor, it's a video game to you.


I hope some of this at least points you in the right direction. It doesn't matter what MJ did or didn't do. What matters is that you are just parroting someone you think gets e-cred for saying it.

[Brazil]

ambchang went fishing for kobe fans but instead hooked a few dirk haters.

pretty much this...

He fished the I speak spanish krew

[Arcadian]

Duncan dominated as late as 07-08 with almost 19/11/3/2 pts/rb/ass/bl.

Playoffs that year were pretty good as well going to the WCF at 20/14.5/3/2.

In sum Duncan was arguably the best player in the league from 2003-2008. You could add as early as 2001 but the Spurs teams were not as good as LA teams in 01 and 02.

I agree. Duncan was the best individual player from 01-08 and 99. It was only in Shaq's 2000 season and playoff run that he was unquestionably the best, and that happens to be the year Duncan missed the playoffs for microfracture knee surgery!

[TDfan2007]

I love Dirk, and he's one of my favorite non-Spurs of all time, but he was never the best player in the league. He was at times the league's most unstoppable offensive player, but never the best player.

If we're discussing the 2000s, then breaking it into arbitrary portions doesn't make much sense. I'll just list the best players year after year.

2000-2001: Shaq (put up otherworldly numbers and dominated the league like few have ever done)
2002-2003: Timmy (went toe-to-toe with the Lakers in 2002 and then took a rebuilding squad to the 2003 le)
2004: KG (as much as I dislike KG, he was on another level that year)
2005-2008: Timmy (2 rings as the alpha while playing both ends of the floor)
2009-2010: Kobe (Timmy and KG declined due to age/injury, and LeBron still hadn't developed a consistent jumper or post game)
2011-present: LeBron (developed a jumpshot, overcame mental hurdles, and became the league's best 2-way player)

[Killakobe81]

I love Dirk, and he's one of my favorite non-Spurs of all time, but he was never the best player in the league. He was at times the league's most unstoppable offensive player, but never the best player.

If we're discussing the 2000s, then breaking it into arbitrary portions doesn't make much sense. I'll just list the best players year after year.

2000-2001: Shaq (put up otherworldly numbers and dominated the league like few have ever done)
2002-2003: Timmy (went toe-to-toe with the Lakers in 2002 and then took a rebuilding squad to the 2003 le)
2004: KG (as much as I dislike KG, he was on another level that year)
2005-2008: Timmy (2 rings as the alpha while playing both ends of the floor)
2009-2010: Kobe (Timmy and KG declined due to age/injury, and LeBron still hadn't developed a consistent jumper or post game)
2011-present: LeBron (developed a jumpshot, overcame mental hurdles, and became the league's best 2-way player)

Not a bad list and valid points but I would have said Kobe 2008-2010 (Duncan was not very dominant that year). but agree with the rest ...

all that being said Amb is trying to play coy but we all know his agendas ...

I love Dirk, like you he is one of my favorite non Lakers (Timmy too) but he was never the alpha of the league not in his MVP year or even his le year. He was near the top but never quite that but that's ok. His run is still very impressive. It is Shaq to Tim to Kobe to Lebron and lebron has been that the past 5 years. I think it's more
Shaq from 2000-2001
Tim from 2002-2007
Kobe from 2008-2010
and Lebron ever since .. and counting.
.It's not just because those guys won Tim didnt repeat in his "reign" but I think those were the dominant players from a media/fan/player's perspective. No this is not based on stats more like a "torch" passing so to speak. Dirk, Wade, TMAC, AI, KG, Pierce, Nash, VC were all great for a while in the post MJ era... but none of those guys were the best players in the game to me. It's Shaq, then Tim then Kobe then Lebron.

Note: The fact Tim has beaten all those guys in a series (IIRC) except AI and Pierce is pretty damn impressive ESPECIALLY since Tim beat some of them as duos. See those are the kind of things that matter more to me than win shares and other bull stats. Tim like I admitted last June is now the best player since MJ. Really only Lebron can be argued but his resume with that last le you just cant argue with it anymore. I accept it as the truth.
But ...Tim wasnt the best player in 1999. I thought he would be very soon but Shaq and others have a case as the best player that year. It was a strike year and Duncan was the best player when it mattered.

[Killakobe81]

LOL thinking amb was serious ...

[FkLA]

Not a bad list and valid points but I would have said Kobe 2008-2010 (Duncan was not very dominant that year). but agree with the rest ...

all that being said Amb is trying to play coy but we all know his agendas ...

I love Dirk, like you he is one of my favorite non Lakers (Timmy too) but he was never the alpha of the league not in his MVP year or even his le year. He was near the top but never quite that but that's ok. His run is still very impressive. It is Shaq to Tim to Kobe to Lebron and lebron has been that the past 5 years. I think it's more
Shaq from 2000-2001
Tim from 2002-2007
Kobe from 2008-2010
and Lebron ever since .. and counting.
.It's not just because those guys won Tim didnt repeat in his "reign" but I think those were the dominant players from a media/fan/player's perspective. No this is not based on stats more like a "torch" passing so to speak. Dirk, Wade, TMAC, AI, KG, Pierce, Nash, VC were all great for a while in the post MJ era... but none of those guys were the best players in the game to me. It's Shaq, then Tim then Kobe then Lebron.

Note: The fact Tim has beaten all those guys in a series (IIRC) except AI and Pierce is pretty damn impressive ESPECIALLY since Tim beat some of them as duos. See those are the kind of things that matter more to me than win shares and other bull stats. Tim like I admitted last June is now the best player since MJ. Really only Lebron can be argued but his resume with that last le you just cant argue with it anymore. I accept it as the truth.
But ...Tim wasnt the best player in 1999. I thought he would be very soon but Shaq and others have a case as the best player that year. It was a strike year and Duncan was the best player when it mattered.

I would start LeBrons reign a year or two sooner. He had won back to back MVPs by 2010. Kirby deserves a year at most, probably '08.