Reply With Quote
It's hard to say whether or not if Dirk had been given the proper coaching on defense, like he has now, if he would've developed into a better defensive player
Well at least some of those around here will have an excuse if the Spurs lose...
It's hard to say whether or not if Dirk had been given the proper coaching on defense, like he has now, if he would've developed into a better defensive player
NATURALLY
how else could a nationally televised spurs game go?
Christmas afternoon, Chauncy Billups faking a three (and both feet leaving the ground) and he shoots after that and swishes it at a pivotal point in the game
who was the ref right behind him? Wasn't it Salvatore
He gets all of the "big" spurs games, its a ing farse
That's pretty Rasho-esque
But i'll be damned if he didnt do the damn thing
That's
Perhaps. But it's ridiculous to say that Duncan would have been as defensively-stunted as Dirk has been if Tim had gone to Dallas upon entering the NBA, which is the hypothesis that I took from JohnMcClane's post.
I never said he would have been stunted.. I was implying that he wouldn't be as overrated as he is today defensively without Drob playing with him from day one. And Dirk certianly wouldn't have been as underrated as he is now.
Dirk plays as much D as just about any other big star in the game today.. heck.. he plays more D than Kobe most nights.. but Dirk is constantly under the microscope defensively.
Kobe is another example of a player that was overrated offensively and defensively because they came into the league with a great player already on their team. Though Ducnan is nowhere near as overrated as Kobe. Don't get me wrong. But clearly playing with a player as great as Drob made Duncan look better than he was.. when have 2 bigmen of their caliber played together before? And as unselfishly?
I think that you make some nice points. Dirk doesnt have the core strength to keep his base square against most players in the post. Especially rugged post players like Shaq, Duncan, etc. although he did do a great job manned up on Amare Stoudemire every time they met last season. His size gave Stoudemire problems because he could close down his high angles at the rim and the refs wouldnt allow Stoudemire to lower his shoulder and bullrush Dirk.
Dirk has problems with guys that are strong in the legs/abdomen that can back people down really well (think Barkley). This is well known and is focused on way too much with Dirk. It's a case of not seeing the forest for the trees. He's not that type of player. I think that you have to ask the question about whether or not that is neccessary for Dirk to be able to do that to have a major impact on the game, and its obvious that its not neccesary for Dirk to defend the post against rugged post players to dominate a game. His tenure with Dallas has resulted in the best stretch of wins in Maverick history, and it might be important to note that in that period, the Mavs are the second-most productive squad behind the Spurs. That is mainly because of Dirk.
I think that the problem comes when trying to fit Dirk's effect on the game into a preconcieved formula for success. Dirk by nature is an oddity. Truly an original and carving a spot in NBA history as one of the most unique players of all-time. Dirk is entering his prime years, and should be able to continue to lead Dallas at this level of production for another 3-5 years. If he is able to do that, we could be talking about one of the most productive individual players in NBA history. I think that its trivial to try to fit his game into a box and negate his success because he's not a post up defender. Was Larry Bird? Watch the Celtics-Lakers era games. The defense wasnt nearly as strong as it is today.
To evaluate Dirk's defense, you should start with this: does his defense effect the outcome of the game in a positive way? The answer is yes. There have been several instances this season (and last regular season/ playoffs) where Dirk has made defensive plays that have literally won the game in the closing seconds. In fact, Dirk is leading the NBA in "crunch time stats" because of his complete contributions in the 4th period and overtime. Dirk has a couple of things that he can do and do successfully on defense. To toss those things aside because he cant defend Shaq or Duncan in the post doesnt make a whole lot of sense. That's not Dirk's game, and that's not what makes him successful. There are plenty of other things that he does to contribute that make him a successful player and there's no doubt that he's been successful. The only other step he has to make is to win a championship. There arent many franchises or players in NBA history that have done that. Its truly an accomplishment to do that. People make it sound like you have to do that to be considered great, but that's not true. Malone never won one, Chamberlain didnt win one until he became a spare on the Lakers, Wilkins didnt win one, Ewing didnt win one, Robinson needed Duncan, Shaq needed Bryant, etc. It will truly be a great feat on the Micheal Jordan level if Dirk is able to lead his team to a championship without a legit second star.
Ha, sorry, do you prefer this?Adrienne, stop trying to jinx us by saying Spurs will win! I'm onto you're little tactics...
GOMAVSGOMAVSGOMAVS HAHA SPURS SUXXXX!!!111 NO1 CAN BEAT DIRK HAHA DIRKRULZZZ!!!
Tony needs to stay on top of Jason Terry. He has hit 14 of 20 three pointers the last 3 games...he is on fire.
If they hold him in check, Spurs win.
I hope so. He's like a petulant kid...he's disgusted and screaming, it means he's frustrated, and when he gets frustrated, he makes a lot of mistakes.
While I believe that is true, I hope both teams bring their A game. I hope it's a good clean fight. And, for both teams' sake, I hope the refs have already pulled their heads out of their respective asses and cleaned their glasses.
exactly how is duncan overrated defensively? he is an incredible on the ball and off the ball shotblocker - even more amazing this season since he has zero lift. the spurs with or without drob have been one of the top defensive teams for 5+ years. as a matter of fact, the bob hill spurs were known for their lack of defensive intensity - that all changed when duncan came to the spurs. you can basically put any center of varying defensive talent next to duncan - ex. drob, rasho, nazr - and the defensive stats do not vary too much. duncan overrated on d? that's laughable.
The odds are pretty slim on that happening!
How, exactly is Duncan overrated defensively. I swear, so many Dallas fans are convinced that the entire Spurs team is overrated. What's the basis for that? A team that has won 2 of the last 3 les, and every player on the roster is overrated according to many Mavericks fans. That's ridiculous.
Tim Duncan is a game-changing defender, not only because he's an elite on-the-ball shot blocker and rebounder, but because he's a great positional defender and a shot changer. Until bothered by his recent foot ailment, Tim had the best lateral defensive movement of any big man (with Ben Wallace being the only possible exception). Tim is almost never dislodged once he takes up his defensive position and he stays in front of his man by moving his feet. By staying in front of his man, he is able to influence players to either not take shots in the first place, or to take difficult shots from all sorts of odd angles, what he doesn't block he usually changes in some respect, and what he doesn't change he often rebounds on the miss. In each of those respects, Tim Duncan is about as good as it gets in the NBA as a post defender. Overrated, my eye!
Now you're being a homer. Dirk has been "underrated" because he's rarely done much defensively. For years, he had the same movement as a crossbuck at a railroad crossing -- he'd swipe his arms down on driving players and occasionally come up with steals, but he didn't move his feet and was frequently beaten off the dribble for easy points at the rim. Has he improved? Sure. Would any reasonable NBA observer claim that he should be considered for an all-defensive team? Absolutely not. Dirk might have appeared to be better had he played with David Robinson, mostly because David was good enough defensively to clean up messes left by his teammates' poor defense. But you seem to assume that David did that a lot with Tim; that assumption is flat damned wrong. Tim has more than proven (both before and after David retired) that he's an independent reason for the Spurs' improved defense. I'm not sure that the same could have ever been said for Dirk.
Dirk doesn't play as much defense (or play defense as well) as any number of great players. Just among forward types who were or could have been considered for all-star spots, Dirk is not in the same league as Tim, Ben Wallace, Rasheed Wallace, Kevin Garnett, Elton Brand, Shawn Marion, Marcus Camby, and Pau Gasol (to name a few).
Dirk is constantly under the microscope most nights because he is the best player on his team, his team has been eliminated from the playoffs because of its inability to defend, and the inability to defend has largely been personified by Dirk. If Dirk comes up big and the Mavericks win something, that question may go away; but until he does that, the microscope on his defense is perfectly warranted.
Spurs better win tonight.
and now that i've said that it will unjinx...and now that i've said that...Adrienne, stop trying to jinx us by saying Spurs will win! I'm onto you're little tactics...
I dont agree here. The Mavs have been winning something under Dirk. All you have to do is look at the records since 2000. Dallas is right behind the Spurs in that period, and even battled them in the WCF before Dirk went down with an injury. Dallas has better playoff results than any team outside of the Lakers and Spurs during that period in the West, and unlike the Lakers, Dallas has remained compe ive and has possibly improved their team. Where the Lakers lost Shaq and gave the reigns to Bryant, they have felt a sharp decline and have been mired in mediocrity. Where the Mavs have given the reigns to Dirk and let Nash walk, the Mavs have improved.
Look at Dirk's career playoff averages. They are through the roof. I think that your microscope is focused on the wrong thing. How anybody beside Dirk can be considered as the league MVP at this point is beyond me. Nash is close this season too, but outside of those two you really have to stretch. Nash has Marion who is playing out of his mind this season too. Dirk has a bunch of guys who are good, but not 'Marion' good and has led this team to 58 wins last season and is on pace for 66 this season. That's pretty impressive. Maybe your microscope isnt revealing anything of value if it cant tell you why Dallas has been so successful under Dirk.
That's a great point -- if getting it done in NBA jargon meant having nice regular seasons and some occasional successes in the postseason. Dirk draws attention -- Dirk's defense draws attention -- because the Mavericks haven't won anything that matters.
The Mavericks of today look very much like the Spurs between, say 1990 and 1998. Those Spurs teams would roll up gaudy regular season records, get through a round in most playoff years, and even got to a conference final where they gave a flicker of hope of an NBA le. But in the end, all of that got David Robinson a bunch of talk about how he couldn't get it done when it mattered -- ironically, the same talk that Dirk faces. The Spurs of that era were among the best teams in the West, but never could do anything about deciding the West and getting to the Finals. If it was fair to question David Robinson in that era, it's certainly fair to cast similar doubts about Dirk Nowitzki.
For the record, I'm not the one who suggested that Dirk was under the microscope, but I adopted the metaphor and tried to explain why that's true. It's not my microscope to focus. But to the extent that people question Dirk, it's for the reasons cited in this thread and, more particularly, because having a few nice playoff runs and winning a lot of regular season games has rarely been enough for a superstar to resolve the doubts against him. For crissakes, that stuff still follows Barkley and Malone around, and they at least won MVPs and led teams to the Finals.
Just among forward types who were or could have been considered for all-star spots, Dirk is not in the same league as Tim, Ben Wallace, Rasheed Wallace, Kevin Garnett, Elton Brand, Shawn Marion, Marcus Camby, and Pau Gasol (to name a few).
I wouldn't go so far to say he isn't in the same league as those guys, unless you're talking about defense only. In fact he's a better offensive player than all those guys you mentioned.
he is better than them offensively, but FWD is talking about defense only. actually, dirk is just a better pure shooter, not necessarily a better offensive player than most of those.
John McClane said:
to which I retorted:
That's why I bothered to use that little quote box before making my point.
Just to be clear: my point here isn't to bash Dirk. I think Dirk is an outstanding player and I think some of the criticism he faces is as dubious as the criticisms that haunted David Robinson for years. I think at some point, Dirk will be a key part of a championship team ( , it might even be this year) and when that happens, he'll deserve all the credit that's been unjustly taken from him, just as David did.
I'm primarily responding to assertions about Dirk's play (and an aspersion on Tim Duncan) that I find to be unreasonable. Dirk is a lot of things, but for right now, he's not a great defender. He's an improved defender to be sure, but he is a star because he's so damned potent and difficult to matchup with on the offensive end. But let's make sure we keep all of that in perspective.
[QUOTE]First off, good post. On to the meat...
Dirk Nowitzki is just 27 years old. Some people forget that. He's got another 3-5 years of prime basketball left in him. If Dallas performs at anywhere near the level they are this season during that period, things are bound to break the right way for them to get into the Finals. I think its safe to say that when they get there, they'll have a legit chance to win because there isnt a Jordan in the league anymore (unless one pops up in Cleveland or Miami). Dirk could break through at any point over the next few seasons. It's not improbable that that happens. Duncan is getting up there in age, Manu is a little older than Dirk, and there really isnt anyone else I think can beat Dallas in 7 if they continue to play like they have for the past two seasons in the near future. The Spurs are the only thing in the way.
Like Robinson, Dirk is performing right now without a legit #2 player. A trip to the finals this season would be muy muy impressive. Robinson is one of the top 50 of all-time and wasnt able to pull that one out despite being a dominant two-way player.
Casting doubts is one thing, but to focus only on his shortcomings is another. To try to illegitimize what could be one of the most significant impacts on the league by a single player in a long time would not be fair either. What team isnt trying to find Dirk on some European playground?
Does Dirk not deserve the MVP this season? He does. I cant see a better argument out there. Dallas has reached new heights under Dirk moreso than Phoenix has under Nash this season. Dallas is setting all kinds of franchise records and has set watermarks for other teams this season. Who would have thought that Dallas would be able to legitimately put pressure on the Spurs to extend themselves in the chase for homecourt? With a win either tonight or in their next meeting, Dallas really puts some pressure on them. SA are the champs. They cant let Dallas make noise at their expense.For the record, I'm not the one who suggested that Dirk was under the microscope, but I adopted the metaphor and tried to explain why that's true. It's not my microscope to focus. But to the extent that people question Dirk, it's for the reasons cited in this thread and, more particularly, because having a few nice playoff runs and winning a lot of regular season games has rarely been enough for a superstar to resolve the doubts against him. For crissakes, that stuff still follows Barkley and Malone around, and they at least won MVPs and led teams to the Finals.
If Dirk continues at this level and doesnt win NBA MVP, it will be one of the greatest MVP snubs of all-time (excluding any MVP vote that left Jordan short of #1). It really would be a shame for Dirk to lose the MVP and would smack of discriminatory bias. I dont know exactly why the media discriminates against Dirk so much in their coverage of him, but it is obvious and childish. Any accomplishment is minimized and any failure is blown out of proportion. Did any of you know that Dirk hit a game winner against Tornto, and then blocked the game-winner on the other end? After he blocked the game winner at the end of regulation? That's what I'm talking about. You probably heard that Toronto beat up on Dallas' defense or some nonsense like that. To carry that type of bias into an MVP vote would be criminal. The guy deserves it more than anyone else so far this season.
This is a big game for the Spurs, huge game for the Mavericks.
steve nash won the mvp last year, and is leading a far different team this year to remarkable success. if he wins it again it is no slight to dirk - nash is showing how valuable he is leading two virtually different squads to great records.
I appreciate your appreciation.
But, again, you're bumping directly into the David Robinson argument. If it was fair to criticize David during the 1990's, it's equally fair to question Dirk. Results matter.
You'll note that my subsequent post accounts for that possibility. For now, though, it's all speculation. Will Dirk's legacy be changed if he leads a team to the Finals? Sure. But until that happens, there's nothing to change his legacy. Is it possible that the Mavericks will win a le in the near future? Sure. But is it possible that they won't? Absolutely.
And I'd say that in the near future, there's more than the Spurs to worry about in winning les. That team in Detroit is awfully good.
And yet, despite being a top 50 of all-time player who was dominant on both ends, Robinson took crazy heat until his team reached the Finals. What Dirk "endures" for now is hardly unprecedented.
I'm not sure that Dirk has had "one of the most significant impacts on the league by a single player in a long time." Dirk is a unique player and a marverlous one at that, but, again, the lack of postseason successes will haunt him for some time. I realize that Dallas fans see Dirk as one of the most potent forces in the history of basketball, but the truth is that for now, he's a big forward who scores at high rates for his era by shooting the ball well from distance. He does a few other things well, but he's not exactly changed the basketball landscape, as far as I can see.
I think he deserves serious consideration, but I'm not sure he's going to win it, and I don't think it would be illegitimate if he didn't.
Of course you can't, but you're a Mavericks fan.
I think that's a pretty ridiculous statement. Nash's team is on pace to win 57 games after having lost an offensive force who is more dominant even that Dirk. He's maintained that team despite the fact that 60% of its starting lineup is different than the lineup that ended the 2005 playoffs. Despite the lack of continuity and the loss of a 26 ppg scorer, the Suns are likely going to win their division, have the #2 seed, and will be a virtual lock to make a repeat trip to the WCF. I'd say that's pretty damned impressive.
Again, you might ask Pistons fans about that, since their team has more wins and a better winning percentage than the Mavericks. Meanwhile, it seems to me that Dallas franchise records are fairly insignificant to the overall context of the league (just as any franchise record that is not an NBA record would be).
True enough. That's why Dirk has to be a candidate for the award.
And that statement deserves consideration as one all-time hyperbole. Dirk might not win the MVP, but it's not because he's white or foreign or anything like that. For crissakes, the guy who I think should win is equally white and foreign!
Been there done that. See David Robinson era in San Antonio. You act as if no player has had to endure what Dirk is taking. I realize that most Mavericks fans are pretty much unaware of an NBA before 2001, but I'd tell you that the criticism that Dirk faces is pretty pedestrian compared to the that marked David Robinson's career. And, I'd tell you that in their comparative primes, David Robinson was a far better player (in virtually every respect) than Dirk Nowitzki.
so what's the injury situation tonight?
Tim has his PF, and Manu is supposedly still not up to speed from previous injury.
What about the Mavs' injuries?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
