Diop or Bradley - Page 3 - Dallas-Mavs.com Forums

Jet Terry · 02-19-2006, 05:56 PM

I see the reason Diop is starting is because he is the overall best defending center on the team while Dampier is the best center with his rebounding and post game added. Also Dampier seems to play better off the bench to add to that. I really the difference this years mavs team is to the past is there are 2 good centers while before there were no good centers and Dallas was strong everywhere else. Since Dirk was never that good of a defender he needed a center who could man up the best player at the 4 or 5. Diop is that guy to start off games and Dampier does a good job also.

Five-ofan · 02-19-2006, 06:00 PM

Damp is ALOT better than diop. Damp just comes off the bench so he doesnt get in foul trouble and because honestly he plays better than diop but he is clearly better than diop. That said, what do you think about the Diop is SO horrible on offense that it helps others defense idea?

Stranger · 02-19-2006, 06:23 PM

On Bradley: I'm neither a big Bradley defender nor Bradley basher. I think he had a lot of problems: inconsistency, lack of strength, and lack of coordination among them. That said, most of the criticism levelled against him is more due to his reputation than his play. The fact is, for the last few years he was a difference maker on defense and the only real shot-blocking threat we had, and we should have played him more.

On Diop: I love Diop, but he is getting insanely over-rated. He works hard and is a big asset on defense, but the guy is possibly the worst offensive player in the league. He makes Najera look like Dr. J. Yeah he's starting, and has provided a spark, but as a starter he's averaging 18 minutes and 2.4 points.

Jet Terry · 02-19-2006, 06:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Five-ofan

Damp is ALOT better than diop. Damp just comes off the bench so he doesnt get in foul trouble and because honestly he plays better than diop but he is clearly better than diop. That said, what do you think about the Diop is SO horrible on offense that it helps others defense idea?

Yeah we should have all 5 players who score and don't play defense like before.

Diop is not horrible on offense. He finishes around the basket when given to him. Also he is busy setting picks and rebounding that the teams offense is not affected by his so called 'horrible' offense. I already said Dampier is better overall but I think Diop is a better fit in the starting lineup. Very similar to Griffin.

Drbio · 02-19-2006, 06:55 PM

Wow. This thread is unfortunate at so many levels. I've not seen such a lopsided rear kickin' in the general forum in a while.

Maybe JET can get ointment and salves at a discount on eBay.

Jet Terry · 02-20-2006, 01:24 AM

Well maybe some of the people that voted don't enjoy fighting with the likes people like Drbio, Chumdawg, dude, and Murphy. Anyone who disagrees with you are so called "idiots".

Five-ofan · 02-20-2006, 09:23 AM

Look man you can say he "finishes at the rim" all you want but since that is the vast majority of his shots and he is shooting 44% in a career year you might want to hold your horses on that. 44% for finishing at the rim is terrible. Yes he shoots the occasional jumper but mostly he shoots layups and dunks. Jet im glad that you like diop so much. He plays hard and needs fans but the guy just isnt better than bradley was. My point wasnt the mavs should go no d all O but rather that in the event of them being equal defensively the better offensive player wins. Given that bradley was also a better defender it is really no contest.

Drbio · 02-20-2006, 10:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jet Terry

Well maybe some of the people that voted don't enjoy fighting with the likes people like Drbio, Chumdawg, dude, and Murphy. Anyone who disagrees with you are so called "idiots".

Maybe if the poll were set up with a little thought you wouldn't get a meaningless skewed poll result.

dalmations202 · 02-20-2006, 10:33 AM

I have one question for JET, prior to the allowing of zone defense, everyone had to utilize man to man defense. Can you tell me the difference in the man to man that Avery teaches versus the man to man that Nellie taught?

Have you watched, experience, coached enough to tell whether a team runs a system D, or a man up D? Do you know who is help, and who is "man on"? Can you determine if set doubling happens, and who/when/where.

Trying to compare Diop to Bradley is futile, if for no other reason because of coaching and schemes.

What you also don't seem to understand is how to attack a defense. I will be the first to admit, that if Bradley were in the game, I go smaller, and try to bring him away from the basket (his offense wasn't going to hurt you in the post). This was the staple of Don Nelson. The biggest reason being that if I pulled the big man far enough away from the basket, then all he can do is foul when my slasher goes to the rim. Slashers don't get to the rim, if you are running a system D, with switches, and rotations, but causes problems when you have no perimeter defenders - or the rotation of the ball get to the outside shooters.

Jet Terry · 02-20-2006, 12:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drbio

Maybe if the poll were set up with a little thought you wouldn't get a meaningless skewed poll result.

Well I didn't setup the poll and 53 people at least know what Diop brings to this team that Bradley can't. I still can't believe some people think that Bradley was a better defender. That is a joke. Dallas would've won a championship if Bradley was as good as you say he is. So my friend you got owned and are just using insults since you have run out of reasons. Also I wouldn't call Bradley a great offensive player. How rarely does he go to the free throw line. Also having Nash you would think his stats would be up.

kg_veteran · 02-20-2006, 01:10 PM

I have hesitated to enter this thread for fear of the ignorance I would find inside. Unfortunately, I was right.

I like Diop, but get real. Diop has been a nice spark, but he is a starter only because Avery likes Dampier coming off the bench. The truth of the matter is, Diop may soon be surpassed in the rotation by the Congan Express otherwise known as D.J. M'Benga.

sixeightmkw · 02-20-2006, 01:14 PM

sorry I haven't posted on my own thread over the weekend, my computer was down. I am sick of arguing over this matter. it is all a matter of opinion. Yeah, everybody can throw out stats proving their own point, but it all comes down to a matter of opinion. I believe that the presence of Diop on the floor with his attributes is better for the team than what Bradley had to offer. You can agree or disagree, apparently more people agree with me. But who cares. Bradley is out of the picture now. And I did read through the posts, and someone stated that the people who bash Bradley probably aren't true Mavs fans and just strated liking them, sorry to disappoint you but I have followed them since the last time they were in the Western Conference Finals in 80's. My first star autograph was Jamal Mashburns at a Ultimate Electronics in Arlington, had to wait in line for 3 hours to get that autograph. So I am a true fan, have been for a long time now.

Murphy3 · 02-20-2006, 02:15 PM

It's not a matter of opinion.. Diop has a long way to go to being anywhere near the impact player that Bradley was throughout most of his career.
No, we cannot agree to disagree.. There are some things that people can just agree to disagree on..but, this isn't one of them.

TheBlueVan · 02-20-2006, 02:20 PM

So, this team right now with Bradley playing would be better?

This point is moot because you can say what you want but no one can prove anything.

Bradley was the better center, but who knows how he would play now? Who knows what will happen the rest of this season with the center rotation? It just seems that after years of the position being such a liability, it is finally secure, not necessarily a strength, but secure.

We would have won a championship in 03-04 if we had signed Brad Miller. After he went to Sac we just went on a rampage and got Jamison and Walker. I doubt we would have gotten both (maybe even neither) if we had gotten Miller

sixeightmkw · 02-20-2006, 02:21 PM

We can't agree to disagree that I would rather have Diop on this team, would rather have Diop on the 02'03 team, and you would rather have Bradley? I never said that Bradley is a worse player that Diop, how can anyone know this, Diop is just now playing his first year. All I have ever said is who would you rather have, Bradley or Diop. I want Diop. I have never liked Bradley and never will, that is my opinion. You have your opinion and I have mine. Yes, your #'s show that Bradley has had a great career.But he was not the same with Dallas as he was when he was first drafted. So please quit quoting your stats to me, I know what I watched everysingle night the mavs played. That is my Opinion.

sixeightmkw · 02-20-2006, 02:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheBlueVan

So, this team right now with Bradley playing would be better?

This point is moot because you can say what you want but no one can prove anything.

Bradley was the better center, but who knows how he would play now? Who knows what will happen the rest of this season with the center rotation? It just seems that after years of the position being such a liability, it is finally secure, not necessarily a strength, but secure.

We would have won a championship in 03-04 if we had signed Brad Miller. After he went to Sac we just went on a rampage and got Jamison and Walker. I doubt we would have gotten both (maybe even neither) if we had gotten Miller

Great point.

chumdawg · 02-20-2006, 02:33 PM

I always contended that part of the problem with Bradley as Mavs center, particularly the last couple years, was that there was no adequate backup. When Bradley left the game, the Mavs had to adopt a markedly different defensive approach. It is no coincidence that the year the Mavs had Bradley and LaFrentz to serve basically as interchangeable parts, they had the best defensive season in team history.

This sort of consistency in style is a large reason why this year's Mavs are getting good play from the center position. All the centers can play more or less the same role in the defensive system, which allows the other position players to do the same. There is no "trickle-down effect" caused by Dirk having to rotate to the five and so forth.

This makes the centers look (and play) better, and so too the other players and the defense as a whole.

That said, I have no doubt in my mind that a center trio of Bradley/Diop/Dampier, with Benga in case you need him, would quite literally strike fear in the hearts of Mavericks foes.

Drbio · 02-20-2006, 03:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jet Terry

Well I didn't setup the poll and 53 people at least know what Diop brings to this team that Bradley can't. I still can't believe some people think that Bradley was a better defender. That is a joke. Dallas would've won a championship if Bradley was as good as you say he is. So my friend you got owned and are just using insults since you have run out of reasons. Also I wouldn't call Bradley a great offensive player. How rarely does he go to the free throw line. Also having Nash you would think his stats would be up.

I got owned? Stupidity is funniest when the stupid don't realize how stupid they are and continue on. Jet....do yourself a favor and understand that those who voted for Diop were talking about todays player versus player. Because this was so lazily set up noone knew how to compare. The facts are that you are wrong. Bradley is the better player. It's not even close enough to argue about.

stupid people are funny....until they regress into annoying.

sixeightmkw · 02-20-2006, 03:49 PM

here are some stats, and the same type everyone on here uses. per 40 mins, this is from basketball reference .com.
Bradley in his career averaged 23.5 mins a game over his 12 year career.
points per 40 mins: 13.8
bloks per 40 mins: 4.3
total rbs per 40 mins: 10.8

Diop in his 4 year career averaged 10.8 mins a game
points per 40 mins: 5.9
bloks per 40 mins: 3.2
rbds per 40 mins : 9.6

not that big a difference seeing that Diop plays half the mins that Bradley did in his career. the impressive thing about Diop is he averages 3.3 Offensive rdbs per 40 as to 2.1 for Bradley. That is really impressive.

bcrav4 · 02-20-2006, 04:47 PM

Why don't we wait until Diop has played 12 years and then compare their careers.

Usually Lurkin · 02-20-2006, 05:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sixeightmkw

here are some stats, and the same type everyone on here uses. per 40 mins, this is from basketball reference .com.

. . . [stats that show Bradley better at pts, rbs, blks]

not that big a difference seeing that Diop plays half the mins that Bradley did in his career. the impressive thing about Diop is he averages 3.3 Offensive rdbs per 40 as to 2.1 for Bradley. That is really impressive.

uh, you posted per minute stats, so that how many minutes either played wouldn't be part of the comparison. And if 1 offensive rebound per 40 minutes is really impressive, how impressive is 6 more points, 1 more block, and 2 more defensive rebounds?

sixeightmkw · 02-20-2006, 05:20 PM

ok, here is Bradleys per season average of minutes played over the years he was with Dallas and just over the past 4 years. And also the 4 years of Diops career. This is exactly where they get their per 40 mins stat from.
Bradley over 9 seasons with the mavs averaged 1364.8 mins a season, over the last 4 seasons he has averaged 1036.5 mins per season.
Diop over his career has averaged only 522.25 mins a season.
so the correlation between minutes per game and minutes he played per 40 mins still exists. Diop plays half the time that Bradley ever did.

Drbio · 02-20-2006, 06:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sixeightmkw

Diop plays half the time that Bradley ever did.

See the message in that statistic?

Drbio · 02-20-2006, 06:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bcrav4

Why don't we wait until Diop has played 12 years and then compare their careers.

Diop would be lucky to get 12 NBA years. I hope he does.

Jet Terry · 02-20-2006, 06:43 PM

The way I see this pole is Diop's potential over what Bradley already did. I see a higher ceiling with Diop and also Diop of 05-06 is greater than the Bradley of 02-03. Maybe you have a point if we compared Bradley's prime to Diop right now which really isn't fair since Diop is far from his prime.

mavsman · 02-20-2006, 07:03 PM

As far as this thread goes, people that registered after this season began seem to prefer Diop over the Manimal that was the Mantis. No big deal. A few years ago, they had polls on espn and sportsline.com with more than 60% saying that Felipe Lopez or Harold Miner would be the next MJ. Time does teach.

G-Man · 02-24-2006, 02:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sixeightmkw

here are some stats, and the same type everyone on here uses. per 40 mins, this is from basketball reference .com.
Bradley in his career averaged 23.5 mins a game over his 12 year career.
points per 40 mins: 13.8
bloks per 40 mins: 4.3
total rbs per 40 mins: 10.8

Diop in his 4 year career averaged 10.8 mins a game
points per 40 mins: 5.9
bloks per 40 mins: 3.2
rbds per 40 mins : 9.6

not that big a difference seeing that Diop plays half the mins that Bradley did in his career. the impressive thing about Diop is he averages 3.3 Offensive rdbs per 40 as to 2.1 for Bradley. That is really impressive.

The most impressive thing about these stats is that when Diop was putting them up in Cleveland, the world agreed he was a bust. So how can Bradley be greatness, when his numbers, except for scoring, are barely better than Diop's?

For those concerned with Diop's offense, we are much better off if somebody else shoots. Less shots for him is more for some damnned fine shooters. It is strange that teams are not just leaving Diop open to double team Dirk. I guess if they did, Diop would just run to the rim for an easy dunk.

If you look at this team's record and think they are suffering because Diop doesn't score like Bradley did, you have a real problem. We had Bradley on this team for years. The reason we got the Antwaoines was to try to score enogh to make up for our lack of center. The reason we have Damp is because Bradley wasn't good enough. The reason they got LaFrenz, closer to Bradley's prime, is because Shawn wasn't good enough. Bradley got billions of minutes to prove he was, and he never did. It is obvious to everyone except a few who think that statistics, which are an attempt to understand the game, are more believable than the game itself. As long as Braley was a Dallas Mav, he was a decent backup center. No more, no less. He had a soft jumper, made a lot of blocks, got a lot of rebounds, was an extremely decnet human beings who failed to compete with the dominant centers of his time. There are no stats that will make that last sentence stop being true.

I love cars. A new$35k Mustang Cobra will have very similar 0-60 times, and pull close to the same numbers on the skidpad and the slalom as a $50k BMW M3, a $90k Maserati or a $225k Aston Martin Vanquish. They are are nice, fast sports coupes. But to say their matching statistics prove they are equal is just plain stupid. Stats measure what they measure. Plenty that they don't measure is very valuable.

Kevin Garnett has better stats than Dirk. Wanna trade? I'd rather win.

orangedays · 02-24-2006, 02:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chumdawg

I always contended that part of the problem with Bradley as Mavs center, particularly the last couple years, was that there was no adequate backup. When Bradley left the game, the Mavs had to adopt a markedly different defensive approach. It is no coincidence that the year the Mavs had Bradley and LaFrentz to serve basically as interchangeable parts, they had the best defensive season in team history.

This sort of consistency in style is a large reason why this year's Mavs are getting good play from the center position. All the centers can play more or less the same role in the defensive system, which allows the other position players to do the same. There is no "trickle-down effect" caused by Dirk having to rotate to the five and so forth.

This makes the centers look (and play) better, and so too the other players and the defense as a whole.

That said, I have no doubt in my mind that a center trio of Bradley/Diop/Dampier, with Benga in case you need him, would quite literally strike fear in the hearts of Mavericks foes.

Word.

Jet Terry · 02-24-2006, 03:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by G-Man

The most impressive thing about these stats is that when Diop was putting them up in Cleveland, the world agreed he was a bust. So how can Bradley be greatness, when his numbers, except for scoring, are barely better than Diop's?

For those concerned with Diop's offense, we are much better off if somebody else shoots. Less shots for him is more for some damnned fine shooters. It is strange that teams are not just leaving Diop open to double team Dirk. I guess if they did, Diop would just run to the rim for an easy dunk.

If you look at this team's record and think they are suffering because Diop doesn't score like Bradley did, you have a real problem. We had Bradley on this team for years. The reason we got the Antwaoines was to try to score enogh to make up for our lack of center. The reason we have Damp is because Bradley wasn't good enough. The reason they got LaFrenz, closer to Bradley's prime, is because Shawn wasn't good enough. Bradley got billions of minutes to prove he was, and he never did. It is obvious to everyone except a few who think that statistics, which are an attempt to understand the game, are more believable than the game itself. As long as Braley was a Dallas Mav, he was a decent backup center. No more, no less. He had a soft jumper, made a lot of blocks, got a lot of rebounds, was an extremely decnet human beings who failed to compete with the dominant centers of his time. There are no stats that will make that last sentence stop being true.

I love cars. A new$35k Mustang Cobra will have very similar 0-60 times, and pull close to the same numbers on the skidpad and the slalom as a $50k BMW M3, a $90k Maserati or a $225k Aston Martin Vanquish. They are are nice, fast sports coupes. But to say their matching statistics prove they are equal is just plain stupid. Stats measure what they measure. Plenty that they don't measure is very valuable.

Kevin Garnett has better stats than Dirk. Wanna trade? I'd rather win.

Couldn't have said it better. Bradley looks good on the stat board but it never took his team anywhere. Stats can be decieving sometimes and Bradley is one of those type of players. Part of the reason I like Diop is that he doesn't shoot much. He is willing to do all the little things without demanding the ball and plays hard no matter what.

alby · 02-24-2006, 10:25 AM

Bradley has taken his team further than Diop has.

sixeightmkw · 02-24-2006, 10:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alby

Bradley has taken his team further than Diop has.

Braldey has been on a team that has gone further than any team Diop has been on. I don't know about Bradley taking anyone anywhere. I think Dirk might have something to say about taking that team somewhere, or Fin dog or Nashty.

alby · 02-24-2006, 10:35 AM

You helped prove my point.. let's not compare the two and especially let's not say that Diop is superior until Diop has the same longetivity of Bradley

also, can't you say that about Diop as well? that Dirk, JET, Jho, etc are taking the team somewhere..

dalmations202 · 02-24-2006, 10:35 AM

Quote:

I love cars. A new$35k Mustang Cobra will have very similar 0-60 times, and pull close to the same numbers on the skidpad and the slalom as a $50k BMW M3, a $90k Maserati or a $225k Aston Martin Vanquish. They are are nice, fast sports coupes. But to say their matching statistics prove they are equal is just plain stupid. Stats measure what they measure. Plenty that they don't measure is very valuable.

yes, but if that Mustang actually outruns the BMW, Maserati, and Aston Martin at the end of the day, because his stats say that he did, and it proved it. Then even if it isn't worth as much later to some people, it still kicked their A$$ on the course.

I for one would rather have Production than someones opinion of how it looks or what it is worth.

sixeightmkw · 02-24-2006, 10:42 AM

Once again, I , me, Sixeightmkw, never said that Diop is better than Bradley. All I EVER said was that I would rather have Diop than Bradley. I never said Diop was leading the team anywhere, I know that Dirk Jet and the rest are leading the team, all I ever said is that I feel that Diop brings more to the table than Bradley, more of what the team needs. Take last night for example, Diop diving on the floor and nearly spraining his wrist trying to get that one steal that will get a few extra points for the mavs, something I never saw Bradley do. he did stuff like that all night long, got read the thread and you will see diop stuff mentioned all over it. Everyone else that talked about Bradley brought stats into it. I don't really care anymore, I now know that all of you love Bradley and it doesn't bother me, that is why I haven't talked about it since. and this is the last I will talk about it. who cares.

sixeightmkw · 02-24-2006, 10:45 AM

I will do this for you and mabey we can move on, I will not under rate Bradley anymore, as long as the rest of you don't Over rate him. I can do that. I will give you that Bradley is not as bad as I might think, but you have to give me that he is not as good as you might think.

alby · 02-24-2006, 10:50 AM

I am the biggest Bradley hater this side of the Rocky Mountains. I was the first to boo at all the games I went to and screamed at Nellie to send him back to Utah as soon I saw him getting ready to get into the games.

But people tend to overlook the bad plays. Diop went to the floor on that defensive play because he just took an illadvised, terrible shot on the baseline at the other end. His coach is staring him down and finally calls on Dampier to come into the game when Diop made the defensive play. The play however sparked an easy fastbreak opportunity for Dallas, so good for him. He get's subbed out during the T.O. anyways.

sixeightmkw · 02-24-2006, 10:52 AM

there were 3 seconds on the shot clock when he took that shot. I don't blame him for taking the shot.

sixeightmkw · 02-24-2006, 10:54 AM

but again, who cares, I am not here to argue, I am here to waste time at work so I won't be bored out my ass.

madape · 02-24-2006, 10:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sixeightmkw

Braldey has been on a team that has gone further than any team Diop has been on. I don't know about Bradley taking anyone anywhere. I think Dirk might have something to say about taking that team somewhere, or Fin dog or Nashty.

Bradley was a huge part of that team. HE averaged 21.4 minutes a game for the season. Diop averages 17.8 right now. Do you even have a clue what you're talking about? How long have you been a Mavericks fan?

sixeightmkw · 02-24-2006, 10:57 AM

I have been a Mavs fan since the mid 80's. and again I don't care, you beleive what you want,. please read my other recent posts about me not caring.