Official Dirk is Great Thread - Page 102 - Dallas-Mavs.com Forums

Thespiralgoeson · 07-31-2014, 08:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dude1394

He'll just have to go win another freakin ring then!

Well, we do have Chandler Parsons now, who apparently is every bit is good. So another ring should be a cakewalk.

hayth.james.g · 07-31-2014, 09:40 PM

Not sure if this has been linked here before:

http://www.dallasnews.com/sports/dal...ocumentary.ece

Five-ofan · 07-31-2014, 10:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thespiralgoeson

That's what I mean though. It was immediately after the championship that Simmons said he was top 20 all-time, and he caught a bit of flak for it. I think there's still a bunch hack sportswriters out there who have him behind guys from way back when like Bob Cousy, Bob Pettit, or Rick Barry or whoever.

Rick Barry and Pettit are quite a bit ahead of Cousy on the all time list I think.

Thespiralgoeson · 07-31-2014, 10:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Five-ofan

Rick Barry and Pettit are quite a bit ahead of Cousy on the all time list I think.

I agree, and Dirk's ahead of all of them.

dude1394 · 07-31-2014, 10:46 PM

I've seen rick Barry, rick Barry is no dirkster.

Thespiralgoeson · 07-31-2014, 11:19 PM

Quote:

It was no secret that the intense Johnson often butted heads with outspoken owner Mark Cuban. NBA sources say Johnson would have been OK with Mavs star Dirk Nowitzki being dealt to the Lakers for Kobe Bryant or the Timberwolves for Kevin Garnett, but Cuban wasn't. Cuban's hands-on approach and vocal nature toward the referees also were challenging for Johnson to deal with.

http://www.boston.com/sports/basketb...his_happiness/

I posted this in the 2007 Warriors thread just to beat the dead horse that Avery Johnson's coaching legacy, but it got me thinking about how Dirk and Garnett measure up against each other historically.

Since the championship in 2011, it seems pretty much universally accepted that Dirk is a bit higher on the all-time list than Garnett (I don't think I've ever heard anyone say that Garnett is top 20 all-time.)

Just remember, it wasn't that long ago that you would be laughed at for suggesting that Dirk was better than Garnett. In fact, it wasn't that long ago that some were arguing that Garnett was the best player in the game.

It makes me wonder, when exactly did Dirk surpass Garnett? Not just in the public's eyes- that clearly happened the moment the buzzer sounded in game 6 in Miami. But in reality, when did Dirk actually become a better player than KG- or was he always better?

For me it was the 04-05 season. Nash was gone and Dirk took a decent but not spectacular team to 58 wins, while Garnett's Wolves (who if memory serves were favored to win the West before the season started) completely tanked and missed the playoffs- only to get worse every year.

spreedom · 08-01-2014, 12:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thespiralgoeson

I posted this in the 2007 Warriors thread just to beat the dead horse that Avery Johnson's coaching legacy, but it got me thinking about how Dirk and Garnett measure up against each other historically.

Since the championship in 2011, it seems pretty much universally accepted that Dirk is a bit higher on the all-time list than Garnett (I don't think I've ever heard anyone say that Garnett is top 20 all-time.)

Just remember, it wasn't that long ago that you would be laughed at for suggesting that Dirk was better than Garnett. In fact, it wasn't that long ago that some were arguing that Garnett was the best player in the game.

It makes me wonder, when exactly did Dirk surpass Garnett? Not just in the public's eyes- that clearly happened the moment the buzzer sounded in game 6 in Miami. But in reality, when did Dirk actually become a better player than KG- or was he always better?

For me it was the 04-05 season. Nash was gone and Dirk took a decent but not spectacular team to 58 wins, while Garnett's Wolves (who if memory serves were favored to win the West before the season started) completely tanked and missed the playoffs- only to get worse every year.

Yup, it was the year after KG won the MVP (which he absolutely deserved... he was the best player in the league that season). Dirk went from "he's the big guy in Dallas' big 3" to "holy shit, Dirk Nowitzki might be a transcendent player!" in a heartbeat.

dude1394 · 08-01-2014, 12:29 AM

I think it was when dirks team beat crap out of Garnett's Minnie team.

spreedom · 08-01-2014, 01:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dude1394

I think it was when dirks team beat crap out of Garnett's Minnie team.

To be fair, the only time in Minnesota that KG had a better roster than Dirk, the Wolves had the most wins in the NBA. And even that season, the quality of rosters was pretty debatable.

dude1394 · 08-01-2014, 01:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spreedom

To be fair, the only time in Minnesota that KG had a better roster than Dirk, the Wolves had the most wins in the NBA. And even that season, the quality of rosters was pretty debatable.

I'm just telling when I knew the dirkster had passed kg. That was it in my mind.

Thespiralgoeson · 08-01-2014, 01:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spreedom

To be fair, the only time in Minnesota that KG had a better roster than Dirk, the Wolves had the most wins in the NBA. And even that season, the quality of rosters was pretty debatable.

I'm pretty sure the Pacers had the best record that year.

And I'd say the Wolves definitely had a better roster than the Mavs- maybe not in terms of total level of talent, but light years better in terms of fundamental soundness. That Mavs roster was just a f*cking mess- far far less than the sum of its parts.

Edit: That being said, I'm still with you though about KG being the best player in the league that year. He was just unbelievable.

Five-ofan · 08-01-2014, 09:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thespiralgoeson

I agree, and Dirk's ahead of all of them.

I think you might be selling Barry short there.

Thespiralgoeson · 08-01-2014, 01:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Five-ofan

I think you might be selling Barry short there.

That's possible. Barry was WAY before my time. All I have to judge him by are his numbers and a handful of grainy clips on youtube. Still, when ranking players from different eras, I tend to go with new over old. Barry played in an era in which everyone's numbers seem a bit inflated. Something tells me that if Dirk played in the late '60s or early '70s, he would put up insane numbers.

dude1394 · 08-01-2014, 02:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thespiralgoeson

That's possible. Barry was WAY before my time. All I have to judge him by are his numbers and a handful of grainy clips on youtube. Still, when ranking players from different eras, I tend to go with new over old. Barry played in an era in which everyone's numbers seem a bit inflated. Something tells me that if Dirk played in the late '60s or early '70s, he would put up insane numbers.

I watched Barry play in the old aba. He was good, but he was nowhere near as unstoppable as the dirkster was from what I recall. He shot well, but that was about it. I admit it's been a while. Artis Gilmore however was a beast. Not a great ball player but a man among boys out there.

oilfieldtrash · 08-01-2014, 03:53 PM

The choice wasn't Parsons or perennial all star. It was Parsons vs Deng/Ariza/ and filler. I'll take Parsons.

Thespiralgoeson · 08-01-2014, 04:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by oilfieldtrash

The choice wasn't Parsons or perennial all star. It was Parsons vs Deng/Ariza/ and filler. I'll take Parsons.

I'd probably take deng first, but it's a wash.

Five-ofan · 08-01-2014, 11:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thespiralgoeson

I'd probably take deng first, but it's a wash.

I find the fact that you'd take deng odd. Generally we seem to view players pretty similarly and I wouldn't touch him with a ten foot pole.

As for Barry-dirk I'm not saying Barry was better, he was before my time too but he was damn good. He's in the discussion for 3rd best passing forward ever behind Lebron and bird in whichever order you put them in. I don't have an issue with putting dirk above him(he's above him in my opinion too) but to say it so matter of factly seems a little unfair

Thespiralgoeson · 08-01-2014, 11:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Five-ofan

I find the fact that you'd take deng odd. Generally we seem to view players pretty similarly and I wouldn't touch him with a ten foot pole.

I said that on impulse without really thinking about it- because he's known as an elite defender and we need some defense. I haven't really watched him much the past couple of seasons. Looking at his numbers, I didn't realize how much his efficiency has suffered, nor that he is such a poor 3-pt shooter. Knowing those things, Parsons is probably better for us.

Quote:

As for Barry-dirk I'm not saying Barry was better, he was before my time too but he was damn good. He's in the discussion for 3rd best passing forward ever behind Lebron and bird in whichever order you put them in. I don't have an issue with putting dirk above him(he's above him in my opinion too) but to say it so matter of factly seems a little unfair

Like I said, the guy was way before my time. I just tend to favor modern players over players from the 70's or earlier.

NeedlesKane · 08-03-2014, 06:00 PM

When I read that Dirk turned down a max deal I had no idea that he turned down a 4 year offer from the Lakers worth upwards of $80 million. That is crazy! I love this guy!

Did he leave approximately $12 million on the table for this first season of the 3 year deal? If so, I look at it as if the team payroll should be roughly $80.75 million for the players we have signed. I am not keeping under consideration how Jameer Nelson, Richard Jefferson, Devin Harris, and Al-Farouq Aminu all took less money to also play with Dirk and the Mavericks. None of course took as much of a financial hit as Dirk did, but Dirk is smart and understands how by sticking with Cuban he has been set for life.

The Big 3 on the Spurs could certainly have also taken more money, and that payroll would likely have been close to $85 million. My point is that aside from the New York teams we have two of the biggest top dollar teams in this state of Texas. It'll be one hell of a year for us!

Thespiralgoeson · 08-03-2014, 10:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NeedlesKane

When I read that Dirk turned down a max deal I had no idea that he turned down a 4 year offer from the Lakers worth upwards of $80 million. That is crazy! I love this guy!

Did he leave approximately $12 million on the table for this first season of the 3 year deal? If so, I look at it as if the team payroll should be roughly $80.75 million for the players we have signed. I am not keeping under consideration how Jameer Nelson, Richard Jefferson, Devin Harris, and Al-Farouq Aminu all took less money to also play with Dirk and the Mavericks. None of course took as much of a financial hit as Dirk did, but Dirk is smart and understands how by sticking with Cuban he has been set for life.

The Big 3 on the Spurs could certainly have also taken more money, and that payroll would likely have been close to $85 million. My point is that aside from the New York teams we have two of the biggest top dollar teams in this state of Texas. It'll be one hell of a year for us!

That really is amazing that Dirk took such a huge paycut to help his team. It shows tremendous character and loyalty. Dirk is pure class, and I think every NBA fan knows that.

BUT... isn't it kind of sad that he has to take a giant pay cut at this point in his career to keep his team competitive? Doesn't seem right to me. To me it's an indication of how screwed up the NBA's business model is. People like to criticize players like Kobe or Carmelo for not taking huge paycuts, and yes, maybe that is selfishness or greed on their parts. But still, I feel like a player's salary should be proportionate to what they produce. I don't think franchise players should have to take massive pay cuts so the team can afford to grossly overpay for role players. An all-time great like Dirk shouldn't have to take a massive pay cut so Cuban can afford to overpay Chandler Parsons or whoever else.

Underdog · 08-03-2014, 10:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thespiralgoeson

BUT... isn't it kind of sad that he has to take a giant pay cut at this point in his career to keep his team competitive? Doesn't seem right to me. To me it's an indication of how screwed up the NBA's business model is. People like to criticize players like Kobe or Carmelo for not taking huge paycuts, and yes, maybe that is selfishness or greed on their parts. But still, I feel like a player's salary should be proportionate to what they produce. I don't think franchise players should have to take massive pay cuts so the team can afford to grossly overpay for role players. An all-time great like Dirk shouldn't have to take a massive pay cut so Cuban can afford to overpay Chandler Parsons or whoever else.

The owners completely slaughtered the players association in the last CBA negotiation... But it does show a helluva lot of character on Dirk's part to pass up the money so his team can compete.

Five-ofan · 08-03-2014, 11:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thespiralgoeson

That really is amazing that Dirk took such a huge paycut to help his team. It shows tremendous character and loyalty. Dirk is pure class, and I think every NBA fan knows that.

BUT... isn't it kind of sad that he has to take a giant pay cut at this point in his career to keep his team competitive? Doesn't seem right to me. To me it's an indication of how screwed up the NBA's business model is. People like to criticize players like Kobe or Carmelo for not taking huge paycuts, and yes, maybe that is selfishness or greed on their parts. But still, I feel like a player's salary should be proportionate to what they produce. I don't think franchise players should have to take massive pay cuts so the team can afford to grossly overpay for role players. An all-time great like Dirk shouldn't have to take a massive pay cut so Cuban can afford to overpay Chandler Parsons or whoever else.

The owners committed fraud in the last negotiations. And I expect us to miss a full season of basketball in the next labor war because of it.

Thespiralgoeson · 08-03-2014, 11:45 PM

^^ Like I said, the NBA's business model is completely screwed up.

Thespiralgoeson · 08-03-2014, 11:46 PM

* Double post

Jproxursoxoff · 08-04-2014, 12:24 AM

Regarding the Dirk/Garnett debate, I don't know about 04-05 but definitely by 2005-2006 Dirk reached a level of eliteness I dont think Garnett ever got to (largely due to the playoff run, no matter how it ended). Although I was pleasantly surprised that Dirk worked his tail off once Nash left (04-05) to go from perennial all-star level to perennial mvp-candidate. You guys are right though. There were definitely signs before that. That playoff sweep against the Wolves was incredible. I think Dirk averaged like 33 ppg or something. Plus it seems Dirk's had a longer prime.

More importantly, I wouldn't say it's public opinion that Dirk is higher on the all-time list than Garnett. I mean DUHH he is, but I'm just saying that's not the general consensus... especially among younger fans. I actually JUST about a month ago had a debate over youtube comments on the issue. One dude and others seemed to think I was delusional. But Dirk will never get his due. Ever. And I've accepted that so mehh.

Thespiralgoeson · 08-04-2014, 12:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jproxursoxoff

Regarding the Dirk/Garnett debate, I don't know about 04-05 but definitely by 2005-2006 Dirk reached a level of eliteness I dont think Garnett ever got to (largely due to the playoff run, no matter how it ended). Although I was pleasantly surprised that Dirk worked his tail off once Nash left (04-05) to go from perennial all-star level to perennial mvp-candidate. You guys are right though. There were definitely signs before that. That playoff sweep against the Wolves was incredible. I think Dirk averaged like 33 ppg or something. Plus it seems Dirk's had a longer prime.

More importantly, I wouldn't say it's public opinion that Dirk is higher on the all-time list than Garnett. I mean DUHH he is, but I'm just saying that's not the general consensus... especially among younger fans. I actually JUST about a month ago had a debate over youtube comments on the issue. One dude and others seemed to think I was delusional. But Dirk will never get his due. Ever. And I've accepted that so mehh.

I dunno, it's hard to tell what the real consensus is- maybe because there isn't one. I don't really count opinions from idiots on youtube. I was thinking more of the sports media (not that they aren't idiots too.) I just know that since the championship in 2011 there was a lot of commentators and writers seemed to agree that Dirk was top 20 or at least top 25. The consensus seemed to be that Dirk right behind Bird, Duncan, and Lebron in terms of forwards, and right ahead of Barkley and Malone. People didn't even seem to mention KG.

NeedlesKane · 08-05-2014, 06:24 PM

I totally forgot that Dirk played 47 out of a potential 50 games in his rookie season. That's not as bad as I thought it was. In his career he has played in all but 76 games. I feel like his 135 playoff games have more than made up for it.

Thespiralgoeson · 08-05-2014, 08:15 PM

Gotta love Deadspin.

Quote:

http://deadspin.com/5805082/stay-soft-dirk-nowitzki
Stay Soft, Dirk Nowitzki

Even before Dirk Nowitzki lifted a championship trophy on Sunday night, he was being held up as a new man. Nowitzki had reinvented himself, we were told. He'd finally "shed" the Euro-soft label plastered to him throughout his career and, to much adulation, morphed into the sort of rugged warrior that wins titles. The tale of an individual transforming himself to wrestle destiny into submission satisfies a special American yearning. In this case, it's obscuring an even more fundamentally American story.

One can only chuckle as the same journalists who once called Nowitzki a wimp now chide us for not respecting him sufficiently. Two years ago, Michael Wilbon, who was of the opinion that Nowitzki had the constitution of a field mouse, said the German was "soft" for sitting out national team duty in the European Championships on Mark Cuban's orders. "This is the problem with the Dallas Mavericks," Wilbon said. "If your player, if your best player is so weak that he lets the owner tell him what to do, you have no great player." Now Wilbon writes that we must "collectively eat a huge plate of crow for judging Dirk wrongly."

Great. For column purposes, Wilbon and others have turned Nowitzki into a symbol of redemption, a newfound tough who once, as Bill Simmons remembers it in his monstrous basketball tome, "refused to limp around with an injured knee in the [2003] Conference Finals." That's only partly true. Yes, Nowitzki was worried about further injuring himself, but Don Nelson (and medical wisdom) refused to let him play. When Cuban insisted, Nelson put his foot down. The disagreement between the two men led to the unraveling of their relationship. Eight years later, we find Nowitzki roaring at Jason Terry and battling through a torn finger ligament and a 101-degree fever on his way to a title, the arc from soft to hard complete, at least in the prefabricated narrative.

A few weeks ago, Basketball Reference compared Nowitzki's career stats to those of Larry Bird, that paragon of clutch play against whom the German has always inevitably been measured (tall, BLOND, long-range shooter). The numbers are close. Nowitzki is the better scorer thanks to his otherworldly offensive efficiency. Bird was a better offensive rebounder and defender. He got more assists, too, but Bird never had Jerry Stackhouse receiving his passes.

Over his 13 seasons, Nowitzki has been about as reliable and lethal a scorer as the league has ever seen. He's put up 20-plus points a game for more than a decade and taken shallow teams into the playoffs, occasionally far, for the last 11 years. This is not a man who's undergone enormous transformation as a player.

If the external data don't support the storyline, something internal must be involved. Thus the explanation that, until three days ago, Nowitzki was too soft to win a title. Bird, by contrast, was coiled steel, an infamous trash talker who once throttled Dr. J. after scoring 42 points and rubbing it in Erving's face. When Bill Laimbeer clubbed Bird on the chin in Game 2 of the 1985 Eastern Conference semifinals, Bird went and rattled off 31 points. In Game 3, he fought Laimbeer. Nowitzki is not cut from a similar cloth.

Instead of everyone casting about for ways to explain Nowitzki's transformation now that he has a ring, we should celebrate the fact that he hasn't transformed at all. In being exactly who he's always been, he defies the silly notion in American sports that an athlete has to don armor, psychic or otherwise, to win a title. Nowitzki has never been the guy who screams into the upper decks like a maniac after each and-one. He's never tried to be. He's one of the best low-post scorers in the NBA, but you'd never know it because he doesn't play with his back to the basket like other seven-footers. Instead of dunking opponents through the rim, he's mastered a step-back shimmy to get off a soft jumper that nobody can defend and that often leads to a free throw that almost always goes in. Softly. Nowitzki doesn't charge into battle. He fades away. And he wins because of it, not despite it.

The Infuriating Consistency Of Dirk Nowitzki's Step-Back Jump Shothttp://deadspin.com/5798908/the-infu...back-jump-shot

This style of competition is what got Nowitzki plastered with all those labels in the first place. That and his failures in the fourth quarter of key playoff games. In Game 6 of the finals on Sunday, however, he struggled from the opening tip, missing enough open looks that it kicked up a breeze in AmericanAirlines Arena. In the third quarter, Nowitzki was 4-19. This was where the tough guy starts forcing his way to the rim, bangs bodies, makes something happen. Miami cut the Dallas lead to three with Nowitzki on the bench. "I'm Dirk Nowitzki, I'm checking myself in right now," Jeff Van Gundy said on the broadcast. "I'm not waitin'. This is my chance. I could play the rest of the way."

Jeff Van Gundy is not Dirk Nowitzki. Nowitzki stayed on the bench. He'd come off when Rick Carlisle called him in. If Dallas had lost the game and the series, the same critics who dogged Nowitzki for years would have again laced into him for listening to his coach and being unassertive. When Nowitzki did check back in—his teammates having extended the lead without him—he took and missed a pair of three-pointers: 4 for 21. Then he made a 16-footer. He made five of his last six shots. He won. Then he ran quickly out of the spotlight and into the locker room.

Nobody quite figured out what Nowitzki sprinting off for. Did he shed a tear in private? Take a quick trip to the toilet? Had he assumed it was time to drink some champagne and forgotten about the obligatory on-court TV ceremony? The inscrutable foreigner failed to read the cue cards.

Or did he refuse to read them? Nowitzki has always been more renegade than people give him credit for. He doesn't have an agent or a business manager. He doesn't care about endorsements or personal branding, our latest tawdry generational birthright. He mocked the Gatorade bottles product-placed in front of the players on press-conference tables and forcibly swept them out of his way at the Finals. The only noticeable thing Nowitzki has cared about on his long journey to a championship is rejecting the idiotic demand that he be someone he's not.

One of the seminal points in his career was one of his most vulnerable. After the 2006-07 season, at a time when he was considered a choke artist and a failure, when John Hollinger had put him on his all-decline team, Nowitzki went walkabout. He roamed Australia for over a month reflecting on his basketball career, on himself, on life. He "slept in youth hostels ... dozed on the beach reading German novels ... let his hair and beard grow long ... drifted out at sea for days ... slept in a car for a week." He engaged, in other words, in the type of numinous self-reflection that Americans might deem "soft," unless they are therapists or have read some Buddhist literature. And he emerged the better for it.

From "Crocodile Nowitzki," a 2007 story by Jesse Hyde in the Dallas Observer:

Dirk Nowitzki was lost. And he was starting to stink.

He had come this far, deep into the Australian Outback, and now that it was dark, he didn't know where he was. Not exactly, anyway. He'd ended up on a patch of wind-swept dirt, surrounded by sagebrush and stiff yellow grass, a place to park the Jeep and build a campfire.

The closest town of any significance was Alice Springs, or the Alice, as the locals called it. It was once a telegraph station so remote it had to be stocked by camel train. Aborigines could still be seen at times on its outskirts, wading shirtless in the muddy Todd River. But that was 250 miles away. Other than the wind, which blew softly through camp, the night was silent.

Nowitzki sat in front of the fire, strumming his guitar and sipping his whiskey straight from the bottle. He had stopped shaving days ago and didn't know when he would bathe next. He had been in Australia for a week and a half, even though it was May, and by all accounts he should have been somewhere else. He should've been on a basketball court, leading the Dallas Mavericks deep into the NBA Playoffs. He should've been winning a championship. But for the second year in a row, the season had ended in disappointment. Once again people were questioning his mental toughness.

He had but one traveling companion on this trip, his mentor Holger Geschwinder, a mostly bald 62-year-old German with puffy bags under his eyes and a big Roman nose that looked like it had been broken in a fistfight, or several fistfights over the years. In the light of the fire, his features looked sharp, as if his head had been cut from granite.

Nowitzki had come to Australia because he didn't want to be recognized. He didn't want to be reminded of his failures, of the places he should have been.

In his haste to leave Dallas, he had failed to consider one thing-it was winter in Australia, meaning darkness would fall early each night of his trip. At the present moment, sitting in front of the fire, there was nothing to do but sit and think, or talk to Geschwinder.

"Why me?" Nowitzki wondered, gazing into the glowing embers. "Why is this happening to me?"

He had just a few weeks to find the answer.

Nowitzki did find his answer. When he got back to Dallas, he was zen. He'd reached a place where he no longer feared failure. Life would come to him. He could be soft and he could win. He'd realized that, regardless of what he did, he wouldn't be in control in the end. His mentality was the opposite of the American superstar. The ability to tame fate is the most adamantine and American of fallacies, especially in sports, where it is held that the sheer will of an individual can prevail over anything at the last, even in a team game. (Try persuading Dwyane Wade of this now.) We demand our stars work harder, be more valiant, tougher, more cutthroat, less sensitive, more solipsistic, less socialistic, develop a killer instinct, dominate, crush, destroy, show no weakness, dispense with humor unless using it to mock, have unwavering confidence in personal greatness, ignore doubt, reject fear, embrace hero status. But this is not courageous. This is stupid. Courageous is what Nowitzki did. He stayed true to himself, the soft seven-footer who uses his height to get away from defenders, not get over them.

No other player of Nowitzki's size has made such a successful career as a finesse shooter. That nobody ordered the giant German to get into the paint and stay there is one of the greatest individual success stories in the history of player development. Kevin Garnett, a 6-foot-5-inch shooting guard trapped in a seven-foot body, had to lie about his height so he could get away with playing on the perimeter. But there's nothing tender about Garnett. He's always been a ferocious, howling presence, especially on defense, earning the right to take jumpers by leading the league in rebounds.

No, when it comes to that necessary yielding quality, Nowitzki has them all beat. Without question, his is the greatest triumph of softness in NBA history. And in the end, isn't that the really successful American story? You know, the one about how the immigrant assimilates and changes us for the better, not the other way around.

Thespiralgoeson · 08-05-2014, 08:15 PM

** Double post

Underdog · 08-05-2014, 09:45 PM

Can't +rep Deadspin...

Five-ofan · 08-05-2014, 10:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thespiralgoeson

I dunno, it's hard to tell what the real consensus is- maybe because there isn't one. I don't really count opinions from idiots on youtube. I was thinking more of the sports media (not that they aren't idiots too.) I just know that since the championship in 2011 there was a lot of commentators and writers seemed to agree that Dirk was top 20 or at least top 25. The consensus seemed to be that Dirk right behind Bird, Duncan, and Lebron in terms of forwards, and right ahead of Barkley and Malone. People didn't even seem to mention KG.

I post on an all nba website and I read quite a bit of bball. If there is a consensus outside of Dallas I'd say it's that Garnett was better. That consensus is wrong, but it's still the feeling I get from everyone else.

Thespiralgoeson · 08-05-2014, 11:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Five-ofan

I post on an all nba website and I read quite a bit of bball. If there is a consensus outside of Dallas I'd say it's that Garnett was better. That consensus is wrong, but it's still the feeling I get from everyone else.

In fairness, I think Garnett definitely was better earlier in their careers. In 2004 I thought Garnett was the best player in the game. But like I said, I think Dirk surpassed him in 2005. The deciding factor for me is that Dirk consistently took ordinary or outright mediocre supporting casts to 50+ wins and playoff runs for well over a decade. Garnett's Wolves OTOH plummeted into irrelevance after his MVP year. Plus, Dirk carried his team to a championship- not one other all-star by his side. Garnett OTOH needed two other Hall of Famers with him to win his title.

Five-ofan · 08-06-2014, 07:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thespiralgoeson

In fairness, I think Garnett definitely was better earlier in their careers. In 2004 I thought Garnett was the best player in the game. But like I said, I think Dirk surpassed him in 2005. The deciding factor for me is that Dirk consistently took ordinary or outright mediocre supporting casts to 50+ wins and playoff runs for well over a decade. Garnett's Wolves OTOH plummeted into irrelevance after his MVP year. Plus, Dirk carried his team to a championship- not one other all-star by his side. Garnett OTOH needed two other Hall of Famers with him to win his title.

Oh I agree Garnett was better in 04(I thought dirk was better in 03 btw) but I'd also like to point out that dirk even if you give kg credit for being better every season through 04, dirk has still been better for a freaking decade.

dude1394 · 08-06-2014, 09:05 AM

Go get a room for that Garnett love fest. This one is full.

Five-ofan · 08-06-2014, 11:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dude1394

Go get a room for that Garnett love fest. This one is full.

Saying Garnett was better in 04 is a Garnett love fest???

Murphy3 · 08-06-2014, 12:01 PM

2003-2004 was Dirk's lost year.. Dirk had just stepped into his own as one of the truly elite. In 2002-2003, he might have been the best player in the league the second half of the season. But, Nellie brought in Jamison and Walker.. Dirk's numbers fell through the floor. The Mavs were a worse team.. It was a freaking disaster.

Melonhead · 08-06-2014, 02:32 PM

Is the Australian story true? Sleeping in hostels and a car etc. I knew he got away from the states but I didnt know he went that deep

jthig32 · 08-06-2014, 02:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Melonhead

Is the Australian story true? Sleeping in hostels and a car etc. I knew he got away from the states but I didnt know he went that deep

Whoah...really? We need to find you a few links. It's fascinating.

I haven't read this in a while. But I seem to remember it being great. http://www.dallasobserver.com/2007-1...dile-nowitzki/

dude1394 · 08-06-2014, 03:09 PM

I recall the dirkster talking about that with someone. Especially the camping out and stinking for days on end. Nice way to get away.

Five-ofan · 08-06-2014, 04:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Murphy3

2003-2004 was Dirk's lost year.. Dirk had just stepped into his own as one of the truly elite. In 2002-2003, he might have been the best player in the league the second half of the season. But, Nellie brought in Jamison and Walker.. Dirk's numbers fell through the floor. The Mavs were a worse team.. It was a freaking disaster.

They took the ball out of Nash and dirk's hands. 2 of the ten best offensive weapons to step on an nba court(Nash wasn't there yet but the shooting/passing/ball handling were all already elite) and Nellie chose to run the offense through Antoine walker...