The Second Banana: Dirk vs. Manu

[Kermit]

Spurs fan is ing re ed.

If the Spurs have Dirk instead of Manu, there are probably 7 championship banners instead of 4 hanging right now.

[Kermit]

Manu, easily. The Spurs won with defense. Manu's easily one of the best two or three defenders at shooting guard, especially during his prime. Dirk is an awful defender. He's the guy who would be guarding Bowen or Oberto, people who don't get the ball.

Besides, Tony had a hard enough time getting the ball to just Timmy. No way he could get it to two big men. Playing with two big guys like that would reduce him to a catch and shoot guy and that's not his game.

They would've done just fine defensively. And, they would've scored a load more points. The Dirk/Duncan combo would've been unstoppable.

And LMFAO at Tony not being able to give Dirk the ball. Now you guys are just reaching for new levels of re .

[Spurs7794]

Manu, easily. The Spurs won with defense. Manu's easily one of the best two or three defenders at shooting guard, especially during his prime. Dirk is an awful defender. He's the guy who would be guarding Bowen or Oberto, people who don't get the ball.

Besides, Tony had a hard enough time getting the ball to just Timmy. No way he could get it to two big men. Playing with two big guys like that would reduce him to a catch and shoot guy and that's not his game.

Manu is not easily one of the best defenders at his position. He gambles too much and is easily outmuscled in the post. He does make critical steals and is feisty and grabs huge rebounds...but to argue him over Dirk because of his defense is just asinine.

[Muser]

Manu, easily. The Spurs won with defense. Manu's easily one of the best two or three defenders at shooting guard, especially during his prime. Dirk is an awful defender. He's the guy who would be guarding Bowen or Oberto, people who don't get the ball.

Besides, Tony had a hard enough time getting the ball to just Timmy. No way he could get it to two big men. Playing with two big guys like that would reduce him to a catch and shoot guy and that's not his game.

Good god this post is ing awful. You act like Manu is the second coming of Scottie Pippen or something.

[Spurs7794]

Good god this post is ing awful. You act like Manu is the second coming of Scottie Pippen or something.

Hey delusional fans will come up with absolutely anything to support their team. Back when we had Derek Anderson, it was not uncommon to see lists of the best shooting guards being:

1. Kobe Bryant
2. Derek Anderson
3. Tracy McGrady
4. Antonio Daniels

[patos]

this isnt even a question it is manu by far

[roycrikside]

Manu is not easily one of the best defenders at his position. He gambles too much and is easily outmuscled in the post. He does make critical steals and is feisty and grabs huge rebounds...but to argue him over Dirk because of his defense is just asinine.

Every defensive metric ever conceived so far by NBA statheads would disagree with you. Manu probably gets posted up like three or four times a game and usually he manages to draw a charge at least once in those situations and maybe get a deflection another time and that's enough to discourage people from doing it to him repeatedly. If posting up Manu was a guaranteed way to score, people would do it non-stop every game the way opposing teams go at Bonner.

Every year Manu's been in the league, the Spurs have given up far less points per 100 possessions with Manu than without. Often it's not close. He also annually one of the top +/- players in the league. That wouldn't happen if he was an ole defender.

[Spurs7794]

Every year Manu's been in the league, the Spurs have given up far less points per 100 possessions with Manu than without. Often it's not close. He also annually one of the top +/- players in the league. That wouldn't happen if he was an ole defender.

I didn't say he's a bad defender. He's an average to good defender who does some things exceptionally well. He is not an elite defender the way you describe him though. He doesn't ever individually shut down solid offensive players. You were implying that his defense offset's Dirk's offensive contributions...Dirk is one of the 3 best pure scorers in the league right now. Manu is at best, top 20 in defense (and I am being extremely generous here).

[roycrikside]

This whole debate is pointless anyway. Manu's game is built to be a second banana. He's perfectly suited for that role. Dirk is not. He's built to be the main guy, the one who gets the most shots.

He wouldn't work with Duncan. Dirk became an elite, unguardable player once he learned how to post up. An offense can't have two bigs who post up at the same time. And you can't use Dirk like Bonner, a stretch four who just stands at the three point line hoping to get a pass. That would be a waste of his talents. Championship teams are built on one dominating big man and a star guard. You don't see championship teams with two dominating big men of similar skills.

And don't bring up the '99 and '03 Spurs. By then Robinson was mainly a defense/rebounding guy, like a rich man's Tyson Chandler. Once Duncan came aboard, Robinson became a high post player on offense, but really his value was on the other end. It's not much of a coincidence those Spurs teams struggled to score the ball consistently. Having two big men creates congestion in the lane and slows everything down to a halt.

[roycrikside]

I didn't say he's a bad defender. He's an average to good defender who does some things exceptionally well. He is not an elite defender the way you describe him though. He doesn't ever individually shut down solid offensive players. You were implying that his defense offset's Dirk's offensive contributions...Dirk is one of the 3 best pure scorers in the league right now. Manu is at best, top 20 in defense (and I am being extremely generous here).

I think at their absolute primes, the gap between Manu's defense and Dirk's is wider than the difference in their offense. Don't forget Manu also creates points for others.

[AnthonyM]

However, as a teammate, Tim and Manu have succesfully won three rings together. History shows that this is an effective team. I would stick with what I know, a Tim and Manu combo.

So, if you got offered a much better job, but history showed you had been effective at your current position and you made a comfortable living, would you stick to what you know and not take a promotion because you're satisfied with your current job?

Because that's analogy is literally how re ed the quoted statement sounds in context. No one knows anything outside of what has happened, or what they already know. But common sense and logic are what factor into making decisions of such.

Common sense and logic tells us that Dirk/Duncan lineup would have gone down as one of the sickest 4/5 lineups in history and it's really not up for debate.

[DAF86]

It's so hard to believe someone would take Manu over Dirk..You put Dirk/Duncan together with Bowen/Parker/MLE SG the Spurs win a ton of rings.

Spurs fan is ing re ed.

If the Spurs have Dirk instead of Manu, there are probably 7 championship banners instead of 4 hanging right now.

This comments are funny, they act like it's ridiculous to suggest that Manu could have been a better sidekick than Dirk and their reasoning is "Duncan with Dirk would have won 7 championships". How the would you know that? in '03 for example Dirk had a season ending injury, so the Spurs wouldn't have had him for the playoffs.

Also I love the reasoning that Dirk would make the Spurs offense better just because he averages 20+ pts per game. Basketball isn't a math calculation, if you add a 20 ppg player to 90 ppg team it doesn't mean that that team would suddenly start to average 110 ppg.

If Dirk would have played all his career as a second option he wouldn't be the player that he is now or at least he wouldn't have the stats that he has now therefore the perception people has of him would change.

I don't mind people thinking Dirk would be a better second option than Manu, the re s that think that it's ridiculous to suggest the opposite are what annoy me. If you trully think that then go back to watch the videos and stats of Manu while playing in his prime.

[FatBeaner]

Manu Ginobili. Rings don't lie.

[elbamba]

So, if you got offered a much better job, but history showed you had been effective at your current position and you made a comfortable living, would you stick to what you know and not take a promotion because you're satisfied with your current job?

Because that's analogy is literally how re ed the quoted statement sounds in context. No one knows anything outside of what has happened, or what they already know. But common sense and logic are what factor into making decisions of such.

Common sense and logic tells us that Dirk/Duncan lineup would have gone down as one of the sickest 4/5 lineups in history and it's really not up for debate.

Apples and oranges. Two great players does not always equal success. Many times it can spell disaster. If I get offered a job at a better paying firm but I know that they are facing finacial troubles, would I go there? No way. You have to study how you would fit. So while having Dirk and Tim play next to each other sounds great, in reality there is no guarentee that it works. Manu's greatest skill was being efficient in limited minutes and with limited touches. That is why he was always a perfect compliment to Tim. I'm not so sure it works with Dirk. Its debatable, at least 20+ pages suggests as much.

[ALVAREZ6]

This whole debate is pointless anyway. Manu's game is built to be a second banana. He's perfectly suited for that role. Dirk is not. He's built to be the main guy, the one who gets the most shots.

He wouldn't work with Duncan. Dirk became an elite, unguardable player once he learned how to post up. An offense can't have two bigs who post up at the same time. And you can't use Dirk like Bonner, a stretch four who just stands at the three point line hoping to get a pass. That would be a waste of his talents. Championship teams are built on one dominating big man and a star guard. You don't see championship teams with two dominating big men of similar skills.

And don't bring up the '99 and '03 Spurs. By then Robinson was mainly a defense/rebounding guy, like a rich man's Tyson Chandler. Once Duncan came aboard, Robinson became a high post player on offense, but really his value was on the other end. It's not much of a coincidence those Spurs teams struggled to score the ball consistently. Having two big men creates congestion in the lane and slows everything down to a halt.

Who says they'd both be posting up during the same possessions? Why couldn't it work to have Dirk standing outside while Duncan posts up knowing both NEED to be covered and were/are nearly impossible to cover with your average player?

[FkLA]

This comments are funny, they act like it's ridiculous to suggest that Manu could have been a better sidekick than Dirk and their reasoning is "Duncan with Dirk would have won 7 championships". How the would you know that? in '03 for example Dirk had a season ending injury, so the Spurs wouldn't have had him for the playoffs.

Also I love the reasoning that Dirk would make the Spurs offense better just because he averages 20+ pts per game. Basketball isn't a math calculation, if you add a 20 ppg player to 90 ppg team it doesn't mean that that team would suddenly start to average 110 ppg.

If Dirk would have played all his career as a second option he wouldn't be the player that he is now or at least he wouldn't have the stats that he has now therefore the perception people has of him would change.

I don't mind people thinking Dirk would be a better second option than Manu, the re s that think that it's ridiculous to suggest the opposite are what annoy me. If you trully think that then go back to watch the videos and stats of Manu while playing in his prime.

s use the 'well Manu only won rings because he had TD' argument but completely ignore how playing alongside an all-time great like TD can at the same time affect Manu's individual stats. They act like Manu would be a 15 ppg player on a team were he was the clear cut #1 like Dallas or that Dirk would be a 25 ppg scorer on a team with a dominant post presence and a very good scoring PG

I'd still give the slight edge to Dirk but people honestly dont realize how great Manu was during his prime.

[Homeland Security]

At his peak, Manu was better than Kobe Bryant and did things not even Michael Jordan could do.

Dirk's not even that good. Fans, media, and officials just overrate him because he's white. Spurs fans picking Dirk are just racists.

Plus Dirk's never won a ring, while Mengke Bateer has, so tbh I'd have to go with the Mongoloid... err, Mongolian.

[DrSteffo]

Manu is amazing and my favourite Spur but I still voted for Dirk since he is a top 5 player in this league and probably the real MVP this season, or second behind Rose.

[TJastal]

At his peak, Manu was better than Kobe Bryant and did things not even Michael Jordan could do.

Dirk's not even that good. Fans, media, and officials just overrate him because he's white. Spurs fans picking Dirk are just racists.

Plus Dirk's never won a ring, while Mengke Bateer has, so tbh I'd have to go with the Mongoloid... err, Mongolian.

amazing quality .. I nominate post of the year

[Kyle Orton]

At his peak, Manu.........did things not even Michael Jordan could do.

[Muser]

This comments are funny, they act like it's ridiculous to suggest that Manu could have been a better sidekick than Dirk and their reasoning is "Duncan with Dirk would have won 7 championships". How the would you know that? in '03 for example Dirk had a season ending injury, so the Spurs wouldn't have had him for the playoffs.

Also I love the reasoning that Dirk would make the Spurs offense better just because he averages 20+ pts per game. Basketball isn't a math calculation, if you add a 20 ppg player to 90 ppg team it doesn't mean that that team would suddenly start to average 110 ppg.

If Dirk would have played all his career as a second option he wouldn't be the player that he is now or at least he wouldn't have the stats that he has now therefore the perception people has of him would change.

I don't mind people thinking Dirk would be a better second option than Manu, the re s that think that it's ridiculous to suggest the opposite are what annoy me. If you trully think that then go back to watch the videos and stats of Manu while playing in his prime.

For starters it's obviously hypothetical, so i'm ignoring potential injuries.

Dirk would make the offense better, could you imagine 2004/2005 Duncan not being double teamed because they would have to stay home on Dirk? He'd be unstoppable.

As for never being a second option I doubt Dirk would be if he played with Duncan, it would be more of a 1a/1b kinda like Wade/LeBron in Miami now.

How does a team defend Duncan and Dirk? You can't double either of them because they are both one of the best at what they do in NBA history, in the post and shooting respectively.

[benefactor]

spurfan can be some dumb mother ers

[DPG21920]

There is absolutely no question that dumb Mav fans (DB.comers) are way worse than dumb spurs fans (GNSF) . It's really no contest and the proof is in the pudding. These Mav fans that like to complain about Spurs fans still see SpursTalk as an infinitely better place to hang out than their own fan boards because of how unbelievably bad they are.

[resistanze]

You probably don't remember how Robert Horry destroyed MVP DRob' Spurs.

05 Finals G5 is enough to pick him over Novitski, anytime.

7 rings.

Novitski is a perfect first violin to put up numbers and eventually fail.
I thought the question was WHO next to Duncan.

[ElNono]

Manu is amazing and my favourite Spur but I still voted for Dirk since he is a top 5 player in this league and probably the real MVP this season, or second behind Rose.

The question was "on their primes", not this season... not that you can change your vote if you wanted to, but I'm just sayin...