# Dirk or KG?



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

The game thread got me thinking about this, and when Boston was on top it seemed to be a no-brainer, but now Dirk and Dallas are back in the finals and Boston was axed early. I will leave career accomplishments out of it because I believe they're situational. Both have very similar accomplishments though (2 finals, 1 MVP, 1 title if Dirk wins this year, bunch of All-NBA awards, etc). 

*Dirk:*
Historically good closer/scorer/mismatch or whatever you want to call it. He isn't demanding but if your team is in a drought, you can count of him to go get a bucket. In crunchtime, he is money, both from the field and the free throw line. High volume free throw shooter. Highly efficient. Unselfish but still cold blooded. Demands a great deal of defensive attention. One dimensional, average to below average defensively. Good enough passer out of double teams. 

*Garnett:*
Historically good defensive anchor and rebounder, while also being a very good offensive player. Incredible athlete with great length. 2nd option offensive player while demanding some attention from defenses, and also a very good passer. Unselfish but demanding as well, in a more "in your face" type of way. Incredibly intense. Contagious attitude on the court. Good, but not great, scorer. Can score on the low block some, and can spread the court with his outside jumper. 

Ya'll know that though. Who is your pick, career and prime? Thoughts in general?


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

At their peaks: KG. When he was in Minnesota he was as good as Tim Duncan, and if he had gone to Boston sooner in that situation, he'd probably have five rings.

Career? I think Dirk is going to have the better career. I think Dirk is going to be able to play into his 40s, and will eventually end up with a few titles to go with some nasty career numbers. He also has an MVP and if they win this series a finals MVP. So I think accolades wise he'll have more than KG.


----------



## seifer0406 (Jun 8, 2003)

If KG had a competent GM he would've had a career similar to Duncan, multiple championships/MVPs. To rate PFs of the past decade I would put KG/Duncan in a tier above Dirk.


----------



## Marcus13 (Jul 17, 2002)

KG ; he carried the Minnesota Timberwolves deep into the post-season on many occasions.

KG > Duncan


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

KG became better than Duncan because he put on a Celtic uniform at the same time your sugar baby did?


----------



## carlos710 (Jun 13, 2002)

Dirk. He can actually be the #1 guy for a team, unlike Garnett who is a role player on a championship roster.

And lol at Garnett being close to Duncan, Duncan always was better both as a defensive anchor and lightyears ahead as your go to guy.


----------



## O2K (Nov 19, 2002)

Marcus13 said:


> KG ; he carried the Minnesota Timberwolves deep into the post-season on many occasions.
> 
> KG > Duncan


is this sarcasm?


----------



## Dissonance (Jul 21, 2004)

Marcus13 said:


> *KG ; he carried the Minnesota Timberwolves deep into the post-season on many occasions.*
> 
> KG > Duncan


Deep into the postseason many occassions? All I remember is 7 first rd exits and 1 WCF appearance in Minnesota.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

carlos710 said:


> Dirk. He can actually be the #1 guy for a team, unlike Garnett who is a role player on a championship roster.
> 
> And lol at Garnett being close to Duncan, Duncan always was better both as a defensive anchor and lightyears ahead as your go to guy.


Garnett was the best player on the 2007-2008 Celtics. I like Pierce more than Garnett, I've been rooting for Pierce far longer than Garnett, but KG was the best player on that championship squad. I watched very nearly every game that year, there's a reason that KG got MVP consideration and wound up winning the DPOY and Pierce didn't.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

Dirk's having a hell of a run but KG was the third best big man of this generation


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

Dre said:


> Dirk's having a hell of a run but KG was the third best big man of this generation


Shaq and Dunan in some order, followed by KG, Dirk a close fourth, with Webber and Sheed the two guys who could've wound up right in the heart of the list but disappointed, correct?


----------



## Basel (Mar 31, 2005)

Marcus13 said:


> KG ; he carried the Minnesota Timberwolves deep into the post-season on many occasions.
> 
> KG > Duncan


:laugh: 

Okay.


----------



## kbdullah (Jul 8, 2010)

If you are taking ONE player, you take Dirk. You take the guy who can be the #1 option on a team and force a double team and turn all the other guys on the floor into meaningful players. 

But if you are taking multiple guys (i.e., Pierce, Allen) and you know you'll have another all-star player on the roster, you take Garnett's more balanced game. 

I don't believe Garnett in his prime would've taken this current Mavericks roster to within a game of the finals b/c they would've had too hard a time converting baskets on the offense end.

However, a prime Garnett would've been better suited to do it in the Nash-Finley era than Dirk.


----------



## Game3525 (Aug 14, 2008)

Garnett, he isn't the scorer Dirk is, but he could have been a legit centerpiece on a dynasty.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

When all is said done, I would probably take KG, but for as great as both guys were, they are equally flawed players. With Dirk, you know he's not going to defend well, be a shot intimidator, nor a big time rebounder, and with KG, you know he's not going to get the ball, make a move and do something with the game on the line (his whole career back's this up).

So what it comes down to is who are the players around them. I think ultimately Dirk will be more highly regarded than KG historically because of the Finals MVP (if he wins), but realistically they are a wash considering they couldn't be too dissimilar. 

And neither one is as great as Tim Duncan. Sorry, Timmy was the ultimate two-way PF. Could have big nights on both sides of the ball. Remember in '04, it was Duncan who made every big shot for the Spurs, before Fisher's heroics.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Game3525 said:


> Garnett, he isn't the scorer Dirk is, but he could have been a legit centerpiece on a dynasty.


See I disagree with this completely. It took Garnett playing with two other MAX salary type players to achieve this kind of success. Garnett is definitely more in the vein of a Pippen than a "centerpiece" to any franchise. Centerpiece got him 7 first round exits, and then when he didn't have to handle the offensive responsibilities due to Cassell and Spree, he made his first run. 

KG = HOF, but I think he achieved the perfect storm. Case in point, I don't think KG (of four years ago) replacing Al Horford makes the Hawks a title team.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

HKF said:


> See I disagree with this completely. It took Garnett playing with two other MAX salary type players to achieve this kind of success. Garnett is definitely more in the vein of a Pippen than a "centerpiece" to any franchise. *Centerpiece got him 7 first round exits, and then when he didn't have to handle the offensive responsibilities due to Cassell and Spree, he made his first run*.
> 
> KG = HOF, but I think he achieved the perfect storm. Case in point, I don't think KG (of four years ago) replacing Al Horford makes the Hawks a title team.


Aside from the two years he played with Spree and Cassell, he played on some _miserable_ teams during a time of exceptional strength in the West. Dirk, Kobe, Duncan, whoever: they weren't getting out of the first round with Terrell Brandon as the second-best player on the team. It's just dumb to blame him for front-office incompetence.

EDIT: Surprised I didn't think of this first, but centerpiece also got him an NBA title. That Celtics squad revolved around KG, and he was the most important piece on a team that thrived on defensive intensity.


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

Even though he's my least favorite player of all time, I'll give the nod to KG. He just affects the game in more ways out there.

Dirk has put himself in the KG/Barkley/Malone conversation though.


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

Oh, and anyone who actually believes KG > Duncan is a moron.


----------



## Game3525 (Aug 14, 2008)

HKF said:


> See I disagree with this completely. It took Garnett playing with two other MAX salary type players to achieve this kind of success. Garnett is definitely more in the vein of a Pippen than a "centerpiece" to any franchise. Centerpiece got him 7 first round exits, and then when he didn't have to handle the offensive responsibilities due to Cassell and Spree, he made his first run.
> 
> KG = HOF, but I think he achieved the perfect storm. Case in point, I don't think KG (of four years ago) replacing Al Horford makes the Hawks a title team.


You don't have to be the number option on offense to be a centerpiece of a team though IMO.


----------



## RollWithEm (Jul 16, 2002)

Prime KG would have a much better shot at shutting down Dirk than the other way around.

EDIT: Mods, we have a player comparisons forum for threads like this.


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

I wonder if anyone ever even visits the player comparison forum. I know I don't. Oh well. Good input everyone, looks like this thread is going to die in a dead forum.


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

You're complaining about how this is going to die in the player comparison board when you haven't even given your opinion?


----------



## RollWithEm (Jul 16, 2002)

Sir Patchwork said:


> I wonder if anyone ever even visits the player comparison forum. I know I don't. Oh well. Good input everyone, looks like this thread is going to die in a dead forum.


What a great way to build up the status of a board! Complain about how it's crappy. Way to contribute.


----------



## Noyze (Oct 7, 2010)

RollWithEm said:


> What a great way to build up the status of a board! Complain about how it's crappy. Way to contribute.


But please don't write off what he said without thinking about it. On another basketball forum player comparison threads like this get alot of hits cause they leave it in the general thread. Sure it's not what we do here and not as organized but the site is very active. I'm sure alot of the posters on this forum feel like alot of the threads they make will get quickly moved if they don't stick close to the rules. This thread was made in the heat of the moment, Dirk is hot right now and people want to talk about him.


----------



## Pump Bacon (Dec 11, 2010)

KG was a more complete and versatile player but I'll go with Dirk.

Dirk did more as the no.1 guy (50+ wins in the past decade or so, led his team to the Finals twice and could very well do it again), likely will have a longer career of high play since he's been healthy and his game is suited to aging well, averages 26 ppg and 10 boards in the playoffs which is ridiculous and even moreso when you look at his high %'s, and is one of the biggest match-up nightmares the league has ever seen. 

Dirk's also beaten KG, Duncan, and Pau Gasol throughout his career in the playoffs. Led a team to the Finals twice with supporting casts that rival the lacking 03 Spurs or Hakeem's Rockets, at least these Mavs anyway.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Wow I know KG has hit a rough patch, but man a year or two ago, he'd be winning this thread handily. Especially since the Mavs weren't doing so hot. With that said, Dirk it seems has been able to play on that high level longer than KG and TD.


----------



## Pump Bacon (Dec 11, 2010)

HB said:


> Wow I know KG has hit a rough patch, but man when a year or two ago, he'd be winning this thread handily. Especially since the Mavs weren't doing so hot. With that said, Dirk it seems has been able to play on that high level longer than KG and TD.


True but this has been a legendary turnaround for Dirk and the Mavs which goes a long way in revisiting careers and adding to their legacies. Also helps that Dirk is younger than most of the greats from his generation. He's also been healthier than his peers and his game seems like it'll age with the best of them. 

Dirk and the Mavs went from being a joke of a pretender to embarrassing Phil Jackson's defending champs and now are on the verge of a championship against a stacked Big 3. I can still remember even a good coach like George Karl openly admitting they wanted the Mavs in the first round...lets see if he thinks the same next season!


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

Bogg said:


> Shaq and Dunan in some order, followed by KG, Dirk a close fourth, with Webber and Sheed the two guys who could've wound up right in the heart of the list but disappointed, correct?


About right yeah


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

Let's be real too, Dirk's dearth of defense at a big man position is a killer. He's having the best run of his life right now but he still looks lost every so often on D. That's huge when you talk about what wins teams basketball games.

Dirk's lack of defensive presence is the primary reason he doesn't have more rings, 'cause the Mavericks have needed an All-NBA type of defender to make up for him. He finally got close to it in Chandler and now look. Makes you wonder.

And I don't agree that KG wasn't a centerpiece. When people say that all they mean is they want the guy to will you down the stretch with points. KG was what Dwight Howard will be to this generation. He singlehandedly takes care of your defense and basically the board situation too. He's like an offensive line, they're the vessel that allows all the pretty **** to go down, but you never appreciate their value until they're not there. Rebound and defense are the nuts and bolts of winners, and he's a guy who singehandedly supplemented the entire team with that.

So you can sit up there with the 7 straight losses ****, yeah maybe him not being a great scorer hurt him until Cassell and Spree showed up, but let's be real he singlehandedly could get you 50 wins a year with what he offered. Just because he wasn't scoring points doesn't mean he wasn't a franchise player, you'd be nuts to think otherwise.

At the end of the day KG wins out because it's easier to cover his "weakness" than Dirks.


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

RollWithEm said:


> What a great way to build up the status of a board! Complain about how it's crappy. Way to contribute.


I don't really care about building up the player comparison forum, sorry. I think my 25,000 posts here over the past 10 years just about is enough contribution.


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

VanillaPrice said:


> You're complaining about how this is going to die in the player comparison board when you haven't even given your opinion?


Is that going to make a difference in it's placement? I don't see the relevance. 

I take Garnett. I believe it's easy to build around him and his abilities. He was never close to the dangerous scoring threat that Dirk is, in crunchtime or any time, but he is better than Dirk at literally every other aspect of basketball. I'm not someone who values scoring above everything. I think there are other valuable aspects of the game and Garnett excels at many of them. 

I just wanted peoples opinions because I've noticed how valuable a 4th quarter scoring threat is to some fans, so I thought this would be an interesting comparison. Probably the best 4th quarter scoring power forward ever against probably the most versatile two-way power forward of all-time. It's a comparison of two extremes.


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

Sir Patchwork said:


> Is that going to make a difference in it's placement? I don't see the relevance.
> 
> I take Garnett. I believe it's easy to build around him and his abilities. He was never close to the dangerous scoring threat that Dirk is, in crunchtime or any time, but he is better than Dirk at literally every other aspect of basketball. I'm not someone who values scoring above everything. I think there are other valuable aspects of the game and Garnett excels at many of them.
> 
> I just wanted peoples opinions because I've noticed how valuable a 4th quarter scoring threat is to some fans, so I thought this would be an interesting comparison. Probably the best 4th quarter scoring power forward ever against probably the most versatile two-way power forward of all-time. It's a comparison of two extremes.


Well atleast we agree on something.


----------



## 96 draft (Apr 1, 2006)

I take the big ticket by far. I would love to see Dirk play on some of the awful Wolves squads that Garnett had to carry in the early 00's, instead of consistently playing for some of the deepest teams in the NBA. Plus defense, rebounding, is that really even a question? Dirk's a better scoring threat but it's not by nearly as wide of a margin as Garnett is a better defender and rebounder. If you want to get techincal Dirk's probably a better scorer than Tim Duncan too, does that make him better?


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

People really want to act like Dirk has not played with great teammates his entire freaking career and hasn't done **** until this year when the too of the West is down. When Webber was in SacTown, their teammates were similar and the Kings were always more highly regarded. The reinvention of Dirk is in full effect.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Heh? Haven't the Mavs made it to a few conference finals and the finals in recent years?


----------



## RollWithEm (Jul 16, 2002)

Noyze said:


> But please don't write off what he said without thinking about it. On another basketball forum player comparison threads like this get alot of hits cause they leave it in the general thread. Sure it's not what we do here and not as organized but the site is very active. I'm sure alot of the posters on this forum feel like alot of the threads they make will get quickly moved if they don't stick close to the rules. This thread was made in the heat of the moment, Dirk is hot right now and people want to talk about him.


Think about what you're suggesting. We're literally talking about the same exact number of clicks. It's not like it's hidden or locked or anything.


----------



## o.iatlhawksfan (Mar 3, 2006)

They both have an MVP and after the playoffs they both will have a ring. If that was the case I take KG only becase during his prime years in Minny he was more dominate, and carried his team with a bunch of losers. Going to Boston and winning a title immediately when he gets there shows you just how good he could've been. Dirk has had a good career, but he's had his soft moments. Letting David West punk him around, getting beat out the first round as a #1 seed.


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

o.iatlhawksfan said:


> They *both have an MVP* and after the playoffs they both will have a ring. If that was the case I take KG only becase during his prime years in Minny he was more dominate, and carried his team with a bunch of losers. Going to Boston and winning a title immediately when he gets there shows you just how good he could've been. Dirk has had a good career, but he's had his soft moments. Letting David West punk him around, getting beat out the first round as a #1 seed.


IIRC, KG is the sole MVP to not get into the playoffs the following year in, say, at least 20 years.
Meh. His MVP was an error of judgement.
Yeah, KG is the better defender of the duo, but unless we're talking about a formidable defensive Center, i don't think individual defense is all that. *Team *defense wins championships.
That being said, Dirk is THE franchise player between the two. I Dallas wins it this year, he should be regarded above KG in the All-time lists.
If he doesn't, they will be on par (with the edge to Dirk).


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

PauloCatarino said:


> IIRC, KG is the sole MVP to not get into the playoffs the following year in, say, at least 20 years.
> Meh. His MVP was an error of judgement.
> Yeah, KG is the better defender of the duo, but unless we're talking about a formidable defensive Center, i don't think individual defense is all that. *Team *defense wins championships.
> That being said, Dirk is THE franchise player between the two. I Dallas wins it this year, he should be regarded above KG in the All-time lists.
> If he doesn't, they will be on par (with the edge to Dirk).


Who was better than KG in 2004? Duncan maybe, but he's regarded as the best power forward by anyone who isn't an idiot anyways.

KG can anchor a championship level defense, is a better passer, and a much better rebounder. Dirk scores more and can deliver with sweet jumpers down the stretch, but KG is the overall more valuable player.

Nowitzki has turned it into a debate with his play this season/post season though. I officially respect the hell out of the guy.


----------



## Pump Bacon (Dec 11, 2010)

o.iatlhawksfan said:


> They both have an MVP and after the playoffs they both will have a ring. If that was the case I take KG only becase during his prime years in Minny he was more dominate, and carried his team with a bunch of losers. Going to Boston and winning a title immediately when he gets there shows you just how good he could've been. Dirk has had a good career, but he's had his soft moments. Letting David West punk him around, getting beat out the first round as a #1 seed.


Dirk's also swept and arguably outplayed KG in the playoffs.

Imo people forget just how bad KG was offensively compared to other all time greats. He was not that efficient and averages a low 51.9%TS in the playoffs. His offense was more soft than you'd think but his antics covered it up.


----------



## GrandKenyon6 (Jul 19, 2005)

kbdullah said:


> If you are taking ONE player, you take Dirk. You take the guy who can be the #1 option on a team and force a double team and turn all the other guys on the floor into meaningful players.
> 
> But if you are taking multiple guys (i.e., Pierce, Allen) and you know you'll have another all-star player on the roster, you take Garnett's more balanced game.
> 
> ...


This x 10000000000. I don't see why this is hard for people to understand.

And anyone who thinks Garnett was even comparable to Duncan is a big, blubbering idiot.


----------



## GrandKenyon6 (Jul 19, 2005)

o.iatlhawksfan said:


> They both have an MVP and after the playoffs they both will have a ring. If that was the case I take KG only becase during his prime years in Minny he was more dominate, and carried his team with a bunch of losers. Going to Boston and winning a title immediately when he gets there shows you just how good he could've been. Dirk has had a good career, but he's had his soft moments. Letting David West punk him around, getting beat out the first round as a #1 seed.


Teaming up with 2 other Hall of Famers in their primes shows how good he could have been? Nope. It shows he was never capable of being an alpha type player.

And how was KG more dominant in his prime? Losing in the first round every year or missing the playoffs altogether does not equate to dominance. You can make the he never had good teammates argument, but the simple truth of the matter is that despite how much more versatile he was than Dirk, he couldn't put a team on his back and carry it to victory like Dirk could and still can.


----------



## GrandKenyon6 (Jul 19, 2005)

HKF said:


> See I disagree with this completely. It took Garnett playing with two other MAX salary type players to achieve this kind of success. *Garnett is definitely more in the vein of a Pippen than a "centerpiece" to any franchise.* Centerpiece got him 7 first round exits, and then when he didn't have to handle the offensive responsibilities due to Cassell and Spree, he made his first run.
> 
> KG = HOF, but I think he achieved the perfect storm. Case in point, I don't think KG (of four years ago) replacing Al Horford makes the Hawks a title team.


Bingo.


----------



## GrandKenyon6 (Jul 19, 2005)

RollWithEm said:


> Prime KG would have a much better shot at shutting down Dirk than the other way around.
> 
> EDIT: Mods, we have a player comparisons forum for threads like this.


Prime KG had no shot whatsoever of shutting Dirk down, unless getting lit up for 33 points per game (10 higher than his regular season average) in the playoffs and getting swept constitutes shutting him down.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Lol Dirk is finally in a position to win because they have guys covering up for his deficiencies on the court. If they lose this series, all this talk about being the number one option goes down the drain. Dirk continually looks good season after season because Dallas management as surrounded him with competent players. No one's arguing he is a great offensive player, but KG's prime was spent playing with some not so great players. Think about it, if the Celts had won 2 or 3 championships, this conversation would be done with because KG would be seen in an even better light. His health issues are why they never won more than just one, that's a testament to his greatness.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

GrandKenyon6 said:


> Prime KG had no shot whatsoever of shutting Dirk down, unless getting lit up for 33 points per game (10 higher than his regular season average) in the playoffs and getting swept constitutes shutting him down.


It seems important here to point out that Garnett averaged a 24-19-5 in that series. The Wolves got swept in 2002 because Cuban and the Nelsons put together a much better _team_ than McHale did.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Guy CONTINUALLY ignores that point.


----------



## thebac (Aug 25, 2004)

Yep, I mostly agree with this. Duncan is in a class of his own, I don't understand why he's even brought into the conversation--he's a top ten all-time player, best power forward of all time.

KG has been superior to Dirk in most dimensions of the game, but the one dimension where Dirk is better (shooting/scoring) happens to be pretty important, and Dirk is also one of the best in the NBA at it.

Whether Dirk or KG ends up being more highly regarded depends on how much longer Dirk can keep up his level of play. If he keeps up his play for another five seasons and makes at least a few more conference finals as the star of his team he will rightfully be considered better than KG. If he drops off significantly in another year or two, his career will be regarded in a similar light as KG's.



HKF said:


> When all is said done, I would probably take KG, but for as great as both guys were, they are equally flawed players. With Dirk, you know he's not going to defend well, be a shot intimidator, nor a big time rebounder, and with KG, you know he's not going to get the ball, make a move and do something with the game on the line (his whole career back's this up).
> 
> So what it comes down to is who are the players around them. I think ultimately Dirk will be more highly regarded than KG historically because of the Finals MVP (if he wins), but realistically they are a wash considering they couldn't be too dissimilar.
> 
> And neither one is as great as Tim Duncan. Sorry, Timmy was the ultimate two-way PF. Could have big nights on both sides of the ball. Remember in '04, it was Duncan who made every big shot for the Spurs, before Fisher's heroics.


----------



## Pump Bacon (Dec 11, 2010)

thebac said:


> Yep, I mostly agree with this. Duncan is in a class of his own, I don't understand why he's even brought into the conversation--he's a top ten all-time player, best power forward of all time.
> 
> KG has been superior to Dirk in most dimensions of the game, but the one dimension where Dirk is better (shooting/scoring) happens to be pretty important, and Dirk is also one of the best in the NBA at it.
> 
> Whether Dirk or KG ends up being more highly regarded depends on how much longer Dirk can keep up his level of play. If he keeps up his play for another five seasons and makes at least a few more conference finals as the star of his team he will rightfully be considered better than KG. If he drops off significantly in another year or two, his career will be regarded in a similar light as KG's.


True that and HKF's post was solid as well.

Imo one very underrated aspect about Dirk is that he'll probably have one hell of a long career since he's been healthy and his game is made for aging well. Dirk could have several years of high play and even another ring or two when its all said and done.


----------



## RollWithEm (Jul 16, 2002)

thebac said:


> Duncan is in a class of his own, I don't understand why he's even brought into the conversation--he's a top ten all-time player, best power forward of all time.


He's a valuable comparison as a contemporary to both of these players.


----------



## thebac (Aug 25, 2004)

I agree that Dirk has more weaknesses. However, his strengths are also much harder to duplicate. Because he's such a great free throw shooter and someone who can shoot over you or drive to the hole, he is able to deliver in close games, and that made a huge difference in these playoffs.

KG is multi-talented but his strengths can be more easily duplicated.



Dre said:


> Let's be real too, Dirk's dearth of defense at a big man position is a killer. He's having the best run of his life right now but he still looks lost every so often on D. That's huge when you talk about what wins teams basketball games.
> 
> Dirk's lack of defensive presence is the primary reason he doesn't have more rings, 'cause the Mavericks have needed an All-NBA type of defender to make up for him. He finally got close to it in Chandler and now look. Makes you wonder.
> 
> ...


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

thebac said:


> I agree that Dirk has more weaknesses. However, his strengths are also much harder to duplicate. Because he's such a great free throw shooter and someone who can shoot over you or drive to the hole, he is able to deliver in close games, and that made a huge difference in these playoffs.
> 
> KG is multi-talented but his strengths can be more easily duplicated.


I don't think it's easy to be able to defend anyone from 2-5, put the ball on the floor and have the courtvision KG had. Plus defensively and on the boards he was great as well. 

We can agree to disagree though


----------



## thebac (Aug 25, 2004)

Nothing wrong with agreeing to disagree.

For what it's worth, I didn't mean to suggest that it's easy to find a single player who can do what KG does. What I mean is that it's easier to build a team that can duplicate his strengths such that they collectively can duplicate what KG does. On the other hand, Dirk's strengths are harder to duplicate--there just aren't that many dominant offensive players in the NBA.



Dre said:


> I don't think it's easy to be able to defend anyone from 2-5, put the ball on the floor and have the courtvision KG had. Plus defensively and on the boards he was great as well.
> 
> We can agree to disagree though


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

KG is ahead now, but he is pretty much broke down on the side of the road as well. I would give a lot more value to Dirk's contribution to a title right now and I think Dirk still has the opportunity to sustain his current level of play and surpass KG. It is not like there is a huge difference now. If he can continue to play at a very high level and KG continues to decline rapidly then Dirk can certainly pass him.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

thebac said:


> I agree that Dirk has more weaknesses. However, his strengths are also much harder to duplicate. Because he's such a great free throw shooter and someone who can shoot over you or drive to the hole, he is able to deliver in close games, and that made a huge difference in these playoffs.
> 
> KG is multi-talented but his strengths can be more easily duplicated.


Agree with this (although I wouldn't quite say "easily" duplicated, I agree with your main point).

KG in his prime is the Scottie Pippen of big men. Amazingly multi-faceted, no glaring weakeness, one of the greatest most versatile defenders you'll ever see, and very gifted on the offensive side on top of that. But like Pippen, KG's offensive game and general mindset is not crafted well to be the go-to scorer, especially in the clutch. 

Dirk is a guy who you want shooting the ball at the most important moments of a game. I have been saying this for years and glad the title to his name finally lends credibility to such a statement. And frankly, I am surprised Dirk never averaged 30 ppg in a season...could've easily done that with his skills, IMO. I guess he never really needed to.


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

yodurk said:


> Agree with this (although I wouldn't quite say "easily" duplicated, I agree with your main point).
> 
> *KG in his prime is the Scottie Pippen of big men. *Amazingly multi-faceted, no glaring weakeness, one of the greatest most versatile defenders you'll ever see, and very gifted on the offensive side on top of that. But like Pippen, KG's offensive game and general mindset is not crafted well to be the go-to scorer, especially in the clutch.
> 
> Dirk is a guy who you want shooting the ball at the most important moments of a game. I have been saying this for years and glad the title to his name finally lends credibility to such a statement. And frankly, I am surprised Dirk never averaged 30 ppg in a season...could've easily done that with his skills, IMO. I guess he never really needed to.


Interesting comparison, and i find it very accurate. KG was (he's a shadow of his former self, now, besides his sewer mouth) a very good player in many facets of the game. But he didn't dominate in any.

But who do you compare Dirk with? A lesser Larry Bird (regarding shooting and rebounding, not passing)? 

At the end of the day, who dou you prefer: a Scottie Pippen (as in a player who is good at everything) or a Larry Bird (who can dominate a geme with his offense, eventhough his defense and passing are sub-par)?


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

PauloCatarino said:


> Interesting comparison, and i find it very accurate. KG was (he's a shadow of his former self, now, besides his sewer mouth) a very good player in many facets of the game. But he didn't dominate in any.
> 
> But who do you compare Dirk with? A lesser Larry Bird (regarding shooting and rebounding, not passing)?
> 
> At the end of the day, who dou you prefer: a Scottie Pippen (as in a player who is good at everything) or a Larry Bird (who can dominate a geme with his offense, eventhough his defense and passing are sub-par)?


I hate Kevin Garnett, but pretending like he wasn't a dominant rebounder or more importantly, defender, is proving that you didn't watch him play.

KG is better at literally every facet of the game sans scoring. And I know putting up points is the glamour stat and what not, but a certain point I'll take five less points on worse efficiency when I'm getting a player that excels at every other part of the game.

And Dirk is every bit as good of a shooter as Larry Legend was; the only difference in the two was Larry's passing ability and the fact that Bird had more of a **** you intensity. And yeah, Dirk dominated down the strech all postseason long and will be remembered as one of the better closers of all time, but Larry is on a very short list for the GOAT in that regard.


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

VanillaPrice said:


> I hate Kevin Garnett, but pretending like he wasn't a dominant rebounder


Historic-wise (sp?) he wasn't.



> or more importantly, defender, is proving that you didn't watch him play.


Ibdividual defense doesn't have much pull, unless you a dominant defensive center, 



> KG is better at literally every facet of the game sans scoring. And I know putting up points is the glamour stat and what not, but a certain point I'll take five less points on worse efficiency when I'm getting a player that excels at every other part of the game.


Ah, but the question should be: who has the best chance to lead a team to the championship? Please explain how a jack-of-all-trades who's not dominant offensively can do that. And please provide historic examples.

As the go-to guy, Dirk has kead his team to the Finals twice, winning once. KG has never done that.



> And Dirk is every bit as good of a shooter as Larry Legend was; the only difference in the two was Larry's passing ability and the fact that Bird had more of a **** you intensity. And yeah, Dirk dominated down the strech all postseason long and will be remembered as one of the better closers of all time, but Larry is on a very short list for the GOAT in that regard.


Very true.


----------



## Dre (Jun 20, 2003)

**** a go to scorer. People act like he wasn't good for 24 a game in his prime

And we want to talk scoring in the clutch, the most dominant scorer of our era, Shaq, wasn't good for **** in the clutch. He was a liability with his FT shooting but noone mentions that


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

PauloCatarino said:


> Historic-wise (sp?) he wasn't.


He finished top-five in the league in rebounding for seven consecutive seasons and led the league in rebounding twice. He was one of the best rebounding big men of his generation, and you're wrong.





PauloCatarino said:


> Ibdividual defense doesn't have much pull, unless you a dominant defensive center,


A dominant 7'0" power forward does a good enough job of back-stopping a defense, just ask the 2008 NBA champions. 





PauloCatarino said:


> Ah, but the question should be: who has the best chance to lead a team to the championship? Please explain how a jack-of-all-trades who's not dominant offensively can do that. And please provide historic examples.
> 
> As the go-to guy, Dirk has kead his team to the Finals twice, winning once. KG has never done that.


Garnett was the best player on one title team and the defensive leader on a second one that lost due to a blown out knee. You're simply wrong here, because there's established history of KG leading a team to a title, Pierce was just the closer.


----------



## RollWithEm (Jul 16, 2002)

PauloCatarino said:


> the question should be: who has the best chance to lead a team to the championship? Please explain how a jack-of-all-trades who's not dominant offensively can do that. And please provide historic examples.


Um... Bill Russell?


----------



## simply_amazing (Aug 23, 2009)

Dirk's the best player in the game in his 30's. Kevin is, well...


----------



## koganei (Jul 26, 2011)

wow bringing up TIM DUNCAN on this TOPIC REALLY??!!

TIM DUNCAN CAN OWN THE NUMBER ONE SPOT FOR THE ALL TIME best POWER FORWARD in the HISTORY of the NBA!

WHAT TIM DUNCAN HAVE?
HE GOT THE rings. (four champioships)
HE GOT the MVP AWARDs.(TWO time MVP) and (3 TIME FINALS MVP) 
HE GOT THE consecutive all star Appearance.

*HE GOT THE MULTIPLE FIRST NBA-TEAM Appearance/awards.
HE GOT THE MULTIPLE FIRST ALL-DEFENSIVE TEAM Appearance/awards.*

TAKE THIS HE IS ONE OF ONLY FOUR PLAYER WHO RECEIVE ALL-NBA-FIRST-TEAM AND ALL-NBA-FIRST-DEFENSIVE-TEAM for 13 consecutive SEASON. THE other 3 are OSCAR ROBETSON,BOB PETIT, AND LARRY BIRD.

*oh wait he was never a defensive player of the year (what a downer).* 

but of course he is going against

THE BEAST THAT IS BEN WALLACE and A GUY NAMED ALONZO MOURNING. AND WHEN DUNCAN IS AN OLD POWER FORWARD
DWIGHT HOWARD CAME.

DUNCAN NEVER REALLY HAVE A SHOT ON THAT DEFENSIVE PLAYER AWARD AFTER ALL.
(but still he is the DEFENSIVE ANCHOR OF A championship team so it OKAY)

*TIM DUNCAN CAN OWN THE NUMBER ONE SPOT FOR THE ALL TIME best POWER FORWARD in the HISTORY of the NBA!*

before I go off-topic

GARNETT over NOWITZKI. 

GARNETT 

*better DEFENSIVE PLAYER:* 

to all of you who said that GARNETT is not a TEAM Defender. JUST wow are you watching NBA did you WATCH GARNETT PLAY. he ALONE MAKES THE CELTICS a better DEFENSIVE team!!. 

WITH TIM DUNCAN, KEVIN GARNETT is VERY consistent as a ALL-DEFENSIVE-FIRST-TEAM during the past DECADE!!. 
(he is awarded the defensive player of the year)
you will not win that if you are not a good team defender. 

AND do not argue with me with that PERKINS AND DAVIS. Because PERKINS is notably known as KG's CENTER and DAVIS is NOTABLY known as KG's BACK-up, what I am saying is these two guy would not even be noticed without kevin garnett as their TEAM-MATE.

*BETTER REBOUNDER:*

GARNETT averages 10.7(season)11.1(playoffs)rebounds per game in his career

NOWITZKI averages 8.4(season)10.4(playoffs) rebounds per game in his career

well that is a surprise DIRK HAVING A PRETTY HIGH rebound average 

*still GARNETT is better rebounder. he boxes out so in terms of team rebounding he is more helpful and have much more impact than DIRK * WHICH more often than not finding himself out-boxed. *DIRK was never known to be Rebounder pretty underrated but very true.*

*BETTER SCORER:* 

of course DIRK is a better scorer than GARNETT

DIRK averages 23ppg during in his career 

Garnett averages 19.5ppg in his career

but all of you people are discounting one fact:

*from the 1998-1999 season to 2006-2007 season GARNETT is averaging 22.3ppg*

*yeah compute it from 1998-1999season to 2006-2007season GARNETT is only one point shy 
from the career average of DIRK which is 23ppg*

but why did KEVIN GARNETT scoring suddenly DIP

BLAME IT RAY ALLEN AND PAUL PIERCE from the 2007-2008 season the system of the CELTICS having 
a BIG three become a juggle on who will be the scoring option 1st=PEIECE 2nd=ALLEN 3rd=Garnett

well ALLEN's ppg during the 2007-2008season is one point lower than Garnetts ppg 
ALLEN 17.4ppg< GARNETT 18.8ppg. Garnetts ppg is significally lower than ALLEN's PPG during the 
later seasons of the CELTIC BIG THREE.

GARNETT WAS NEVER THE 2nd option of the CELTICS offence. here CHRIS BOSH SHOULD LEARN SOMETHING
STOP WHINING ABOUT TOUCHES AND CONCETRATE IN THE DEFENSE AND THE REBOUNDING DEPARTMENT.

DAVID ALDRIDGE one said "KEVIN have sacrificed his career stats, just to compliment his co-stars
he will never be the offensive guy of the TEAM again" 

AND FINALLY:
KEVIN GARNETT is an EMOTIONAL LEADER AND A VOCAL LEADER of the CELTICS

MANY of you are HATING GARNETT for being a loudmouth and a TRASH talker

you know who is BIGGER MORE ARROGANT LOUDMOUTH than GARNETT well he GOES by the NAME MICHEAL JORDAN 
the TRASH talking spree in the 80's and 90's never compared to the very regulate game trashtalk that we 
are watching today, LARRY BIRD TALKS TRASH, ISIAH THOMAS TALK TRASH, PATRICK EWING TALKS TRASH, MAGIC TALKS TRASH, CHARLES BARKLEY PUNCH YOU IN THE FACE AND TALKS TRASH.

LIKE Josh Koscheck who is only doing those villainous roles talking trash and everything for hyping and publicity purposes. GARNETT is only acting like an ******* because in the HEART and EYES OF THE BOSTON FANS what GARNETT is doing is TAKING the CELTIC PRIDE TO ITS HIGH THUS making the FANS more intrusive and more 
connected on the GAME if watch a CELTIC GAME IN PERSON you will notice that when the CELTICS WINS the happiness at THE GARDEN is incomparable, but when the CELTICS LOSSES BOSTON FANS ARE LIKE PATHETIC 7 year old
kids who just cries and complains. 

KEVIN GARNETT OVER DIRK NOWITZKI 

because ULTIMATELY WHAT KG BRINGS CAN IMPACT A GAME MORE HEAVILY than those fade away one legged jumpers 
of DIRK Nowitzki, I'm talking about the HUSTLE.THE DEFENSIVE PRESENCE. THE LEADERSHIP

DIRK IS ONLY A BETTER SHOOTER THAN GARNETT. GARNETT HAVE CLUTH MOMENTS OF HIS OWN NOT ONLY OFFENSIVE CLUTCH MOMENTS BUT ALSO DEFENSIVE CLUTCH MOMENTS.


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

:laugh: well that was the most enthusiastic post I've seen in a while. Ofcourse a large part of it was either jibberish or things we already know, but atleast you're bringing some excitement to the table. Welcome to the boards.


----------



## hobojoe (Jun 20, 2003)

koganei said:


> TAKE THIS HE IS ONE OF ONLY FOUR PLAYER WHO RECEIVE ALL-NBA-FIRST-TEAM AND ALL-NBA-FIRST-DEFENSIVE-TEAM for 13 consecutive SEASON. THE other 3 are OSCAR ROBETSON,BOB PETIT, AND LARRY BIRD.


Robertson, Pettit and Bird have a combined zero all-defensive 1st teams.


----------



## jet510 (Jul 19, 2011)

after seeing the finals there is no question about this one lol


----------



## edabomb (Feb 12, 2005)

The great variable in this debate is how Dirk's 2010/11 post season blows any individual KG season out of the water. I really do think this is even ATM. KG's defense would usually give him the edge, but teams built around Dirk have had far more post season success than KG's.

If either can snag another championship while being a major piece it'll throw the debate well in their favour.


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

I despise KG but you can't fault him for *all* of his postseason shortcomings, he played on some Smush Parkeresque teams for the majority of his prime. Kindof a shame we didn't get to watch Shaquille and Timmy rip threw him with all things being equal.


----------



## RollWithEm (Jul 16, 2002)

hobojoe said:


> Robertson, Pettit and Bird have a combined zero all-defensive 1st teams.


:twoguns:


----------



## edabomb (Feb 12, 2005)

VanillaPrice said:


> I despise KG but you can't fault him for *all* of his postseason shortcomings, he played on some Smush Parkeresque teams for the majority of his prime. Kindof a shame we didn't get to watch Shaquille and Timmy rip threw him with all things being equal.


I agree. But the 2004 squad he had was superior to this years Mavs IMO, and they fell to a deeply flawed Lakers.

It is such a tough comparison because of the offense vs defense argument.


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

edabomb said:


> I agree. But the 2004 squad he had was superior to this years Mavs IMO, and they fell to a deeply flawed Lakers.
> 
> It is such a tough comparison because of the offense vs defense argument.


:laugh: That '04 Wolves team had about four healthy players on the roster and at time needed Garnett to run the point they were so depleted. **** on KG all you want, but don't blame him for falling to the Kobe/Shaquille Lakers when his Pippen was Troy freaking Hudson.


----------



## edabomb (Feb 12, 2005)

VanillaPrice said:


> :laugh: That '04 Wolves team had about four healthy players on the roster and at time needed Garnett to run the point they were so depleted. **** on KG all you want, but don't blame him for falling to the Kobe/Shaquille Lakers when his Pippen was Troy freaking Hudson.


Forgot Cassell was out, so yea it is a bad comparison.

I do think Dirk would have carried some of those Sota teams beyond the first round though, although he wouldn't have been a difference maker at the Celtics that KG was.


----------



## vinSTEEZel (Aug 3, 2011)

I honestly think people are hyping dirk so much because of this seasons playoff run.
but when you are comparing the two, dirk's shortcomings greatly outweigh garnett's.
dirk was considered a liability for a long time on defense (still isn't really a good defender), and left a little to be desired in the rebound department (he IS 7 foot).
when you look at Garnett, the only thing you can point to is never getting over the hump in minny, which shouldn't be thrown on his shoulders, considering he had sprewell and cassell as his #2 & 3.
Garnett won a defensive player of the year, AND an MVP.
dirk took a long time to win his first ring, after years and years of disappointments in the playoffs.
I also think if Jason Terry hadn't gone off in game 6 this year, dirk might not have a ring.
I see dirk as a one dimensional player, while kg was a FORCE on both sides, and could play 3 positions.


----------



## 3Lawsome (Aug 2, 2011)

KG and having seen alot of both of them over the years I feel pretty confident in my choice. Only thing Dirk really has on KG is versatility witch is nice, but it's not like KG can't step out with that money mindrange shot or fade away in the post when needed. Rebounding, defense, passing all easily go to KG. Dirk's more clutch too I guess. KG at his peak is one of the best we've seen. When you think about the talent Dirk's had in his career compared to the likes of KG it's a pretty obvious gap until KG landed himself in Boston. 

Dirk's aging pretty well and just had a great playoff run. At the end of the day maybe Dirk finishes higher on the All-Time list due to KG fading away when Dirk is just coming off one of his best seasons. I don't think anybody who watched this decade can say that Dirk was ever as good as KG as a player tho. Maybe Dirk laces together another playoff run or two, comes close to another ring and keep elevating his legacy while KG sizzles out in Boston. Only way I'd ever rank him above KG.


----------



## edabomb (Feb 12, 2005)

I think it is interesting to put KG on those Dallas teams though. Do you guys really think he would have won championships? I think they would have had the same problem that has plagued KGs teams, trouble scoring in crunch time. Michael Finley would have been the only closer on those teams, and he doesn't come close to the double headed dragon of Pierce/Allen that Garnett finally managed to win with.

If Garnett had more of a post game and hadn't become a passive jump shooter on offense I doubt there'd be a debate here.


----------



## 3Lawsome (Aug 2, 2011)

KG could deff bang when he needed to tho. Dirk scored in more volume and was better in that respective but KG could still get the job done scoring the ball. Topped out at like 24 a game and when you factor in his ability to get others involved, witch for a PF was EXCELLENT I don't think the offensive drop off is as big as it would seem. 

Plus you throw KG on those Dallas teams and there entirely different. Mark Cuban for better or worse is one of the most willing sports owners ever. Dirk had alot of short comings. Against Golden State, Miami in the finals. As better of a scorer as Dirk was than KG, you could throw a guy like Captain Jack on him and you wouldn't need to double much. Dirk would either hit his shots, or miss them. When a guy like KG get's going and decides to get aggressive inside(as it was noted, didn't do it all the time witch was a fault) you'd have have to bring down an extra guy or two to stop him and with his passing ability he was great at finding the open man. 

Regardless of how those Dallas\Minny teams were built, the talent between them was as far off as a contender and a team fighting for the playoffs. Makes it difficult for KG because as right as it is to pull the success card it has major flaws. Not to say that Dirk turning Dallas into a consistent 50 win team wasn't a great feat or anything. 

KG to me was always a guy who could be argued as a truly elite 1-4 guy in the league. Dirk was always in the next tier. As they've continued to age the gap has gotten smaller and smaller. How Dirk continues to age will decide how they end up in the all time ranks but as it stands right now at there peak and in there primes, KG will always be better imo.


----------



## edabomb (Feb 12, 2005)

:clap:


3Lawsome said:


> KG could deff bang when he needed to tho. Dirk scored in more volume and was better in that respective but KG could still get the job done scoring the ball. Topped out at like 24 a game and when you factor in his ability to get others involved, witch for a PF was EXCELLENT I don't think the offensive drop off is as big as it would seem.
> 
> Plus you throw KG on those Dallas teams and there entirely different. Mark Cuban for better or worse is one of the most willing sports owners ever. Dirk had alot of short comings. Against Golden State, Miami in the finals. As better of a scorer as Dirk was than KG, you could throw a guy like Captain Jack on him and you wouldn't need to double much. Dirk would either hit his shots, or miss them. When a guy like KG get's going and decides to get aggressive inside(as it was noted, didn't do it all the time witch was a fault) you'd have have to bring down an extra guy or two to stop him and with his passing ability he was great at finding the open man.
> 
> ...


Yea I can't really argue with your breakdown there :clap:

The only thing difference I would have is I think Dirk is a bit easier to build around than KG. His offensive game opens so much up for his teammates on that side of the court, that you can surround him with good defensive pieces you'll always be near to 50 wins.

I didn't see enough KG when he used to operate in the post.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

edabomb said:


> I do think Dirk would have carried some of those Sota teams beyond the first round though, although he wouldn't have been a difference maker at the Celtics that KG was.


He wouldn't have, the West was absolutely stacked at that time and the Wolves supporting cast was miserable. It's such a wildly different ownership/management situation from Minnesota to Dallas that any comparison of team success is, at best, deeply flawed.


----------



## koganei (Jul 26, 2011)

Bogg said:


> He wouldn't have, the West was absolutely stacked at that time and the Wolves supporting cast was miserable. It's such a wildly different ownership/management situation from Minnesota to Dallas that any comparison of team success is, at best, deeply flawed.


that is so true the LAKERS,SPURS, and even the KINGS are so strong during the early 2000's and 

you put the SUNS, UTAH, and Dallas on the MIX compare these teams to The TIMBERWOLVES with Kevin GARNETT

there is too much STRONG competition on the west for the most part of the 2000-2010 decade.

DON'T forget that DALLAS have the NOWITSKI-NASH-FINLEY triumvirate for more than one season 

unlike the GARNETT-CASSEL-SPREWELL team that did not LAST to make a huge IMPACT


----------

