Dirk Nowitzki vs. Kevin Durant

[Jaivl]

. Nobody expected the Thunder to beat the 73 win Warriors... then KD powered them to a 3-1 lead and expectations got readjusted upwards... but in reality it was incredible that KD got them as close to winning as he did, and that team had no business beating the Warriors with the God awful spacing around KD of Westbrook/Ibaka/Adams/Roberson.

It is pretty amazing to miss 100 shots and manage 25 turnovers with such limited playmaking responsabilities.

[One_and_Done]

. Nobody expected the Thunder to beat the 73 win Warriors... then KD powered them to a 3-1 lead and expectations got readjusted upwards... but in reality it was incredible that KD got them as close to winning as he did, and that team had no business beating the Warriors with the God awful spacing around KD of Westbrook/Ibaka/Adams/Roberson.

It is pretty amazing to miss 100 shots and manage 25 turnovers with such limited playmaking responsabilities.

It's alot easier to hit shots and avoid TOs when you have better team mates and plausible spacing.

KD put up 30-8-3 on 54 TS%. Given the inferior team he had around him, that was fine. He was the biggest reason they got up 3-1 to begin with. Even if you overrated Westbrook and said it was him, it doesn't change the fact that KD played fine this series. They lost in 7 to a team everyone expected them to lose to. Criticising KD for this series is just bizarre.

[Peregrine01]

. Nobody expected the Thunder to beat the 73 win Warriors... then KD powered them to a 3-1 lead and expectations got readjusted upwards... but in reality it was incredible that KD got them as close to winning as he did, and that team had no business beating the Warriors with the God awful spacing around KD of Westbrook/Ibaka/Adams/Roberson.

It is pretty amazing to miss 100 shots and manage 25 turnovers with such limited playmaking responsabilities.

It's crazy how that series loss was dumped on Westbrook's head when it was pretty clear he was the most impactful player on OKC. And Ibaka, Adams and Roberson all played well above what was expected of them.

KD being unable to do anything against Iggy or Draymond down the stretch of games is what led to their flameout.

[bbms]

. Nobody expected the Thunder to beat the 73 win Warriors... then KD powered them to a 3-1 lead and expectations got readjusted upwards... but in reality it was incredible that KD got them as close to winning as he did, and that team had no business beating the Warriors with the God awful spacing around KD of Westbrook/Ibaka/Adams/Roberson.

It is pretty amazing to miss 100 shots and manage 25 turnovers with such limited playmaking responsabilities.

It's alot easier to hit shots and avoid TOs when you have better team mates and plausible spacing.

KD put up 30-8-3 on 54 TS%. Given the inferior team he had around him, that was fine. He was the biggest reason they got up 3-1 to begin with. Even if you overrated Westbrook and said it was him, it doesn't change the fact that KD played fine this series. They lost in 7 to a team everyone expected them to lose to. Criticising KD for this series is just bizarre.

you clearly didn't watch thunder basketball that era nor aside for that series if you ever watched that series

that was probably durant's worst playoffs series. that kind of **** that gives you legit argument for collusion.

[One_and_Done]

I watched the series. Nobody thought OKC was going to win going in, and everybody was stunned when they got up 3-1. The Warriors made alot of adjustments after that, and with some hot shooting from Klay managed to edge them out in 7. Absolutely nobody thought KD was having a bad series after game 4.

[cpower]

28 years RAPM gives Dirk edge : 7.1 vs 6.1 and i think its pretty accurate
Peak is a lot closer, but i would pick Dirk just slightly. More reliable leader and slight better offensive player

[Special_Puppy]

. Nobody expected the Thunder to beat the 73 win Warriors... then KD powered them to a 3-1 lead and expectations got readjusted upwards... but in reality it was incredible that KD got them as close to winning as he did, and that team had no business beating the Warriors with the God awful spacing around KD of Westbrook/Ibaka/Adams/Roberson.

It is pretty amazing to miss 100 shots and manage 25 turnovers with such limited playmaking responsabilities.

It's alot easier to hit shots and avoid TOs when you have better team mates and plausible spacing.

KD put up 30-8-3 on 54 TS%. Given the inferior team he had around him, that was fine. He was the biggest reason they got up 3-1 to begin with. Even if you overrated Westbrook and said it was him, it doesn't change the fact that KD played fine this series. They lost in 7 to a team everyone expected them to lose to. Criticising KD for this series is just bizarre.

Its not overrating Westbrook to say that his play was the main thing that powered the Thunder to a 3-1 lead. You could argue that Westbrook better than KD overall in 2016

[lessthanjake]

I watched the series. Nobody thought OKC was going to win going in, and everybody was stunned when they got up 3-1. The Warriors made alot of adjustments after that, and with some hot shooting from Klay managed to edge them out in 7. Absolutely nobody thought KD was having a bad series after game 4.

I think this is an instance where hindsight is somewhat important, though. I think you’re right that nobody thought Durant was having a bad series after game 4. However, at that point, most everyone thought the Warriors were perhaps the greatest team ever, so people felt like the Thunder going up 3-1 on them was a miracle that naturally required the Thunder to have been playing out of their minds. I think with context we can see that the Warriors did not go on to win the title, and that Steph’s playoff injury mattered. Which isn’t to say that the Warriors weren’t still a very tough opponent, but I think if we look back on it now our view of how good the 2016 Warriors were in the playoffs should be meaningfully different from what most peoples’ view was at the time the Thunder went up 3-1. As I’ve said in this thread, I think the Warriors were more like a 6.5 to 8 SRS team in those playoffs. And while that’s a very tough team, I don’t think going up 3-1 on such a team absolutely requires an inference that Durant must’ve been playing really well.

That said, I think Durant was solid the first four games of that series, but not incredible. In those 4 games, he put up 28.5/8.8/2.5 on +3.9% rTS%, with 4.3 turnovers a game. That’s definitely solid, but not anything particularly special. And he was honestly pretty lucky they won Game 1 and Game 4 despite him being pretty bad. Westbrook was actually better in those four games. And they were also partly just a beneficiary of some negative shooting variance for the Warriors (as well as Steph not being his best). Durant then proceeded to be bad in one of the remaining three games in the series and solid in the other two games. The overall result IMO was a series that was fine—I don’t think it’s worthy of much criticism but I also don’t think it really weighs in his favor either.

[capfan33]

I’ve said this before about Durant and I’ll say it again: if you only do one thing truly well, that skill better translate well to the playoffs, and in Durant’s case it didn’t.

In absolute terms ofc his playoff performances weren’t terrible, but for a purported top-20 player ever they were usually underwhelming if not straight up bad.

[One_and_Done]

I’ve said this before about Durant and I’ll say it again: if you only do one thing truly well, that skill better translate well to the playoffs, and in Durant’s case it didn’t.

In absolute terms ofc his playoff performances weren’t terrible, but for a purported top-20 player ever they were usually underwhelming if not straight up bad.

He has plenty of great series. The 16 WCF just wasn't one of them. It was merely 'fine'. I'm confused how that hurts him here, where he's being called a 'borderline top 10 all-time player'. People here probably think Bird was in the top 10, and he had a number of actively poor playoffs, not just 'fine' ones. Bird also underachieved in those series in a worse era, against worse teams, and has much less longevity than say KD. I think KD compares quite favourably to Bird tbh, and I rate Bird very highly.

I don't think the 15 Warriors were the greatest team of all-time (that honour goes to the KD Warriors), but I think the narrative about them would be better if Draymond doesn't get suspended. Then they win that year, and are fondly remembered.

[lessthanjake]

I’ve said this before about Durant and I’ll say it again: if you only do one thing truly well, that skill better translate well to the playoffs, and in Durant’s case it didn’t.

In absolute terms ofc his playoff performances weren’t terrible, but for a purported top-20 player ever they were usually underwhelming if not straight up bad.

He has plenty of great series. The 16 WCF just wasn't one of them. It was merely 'fine'. I'm confused how that hurts him here, where he's being called a 'borderline top 10 all-time player'. People here probably think Bird was in the top 10, and he had a number of actively poor playoffs, not just 'fine' ones. Bird also underachieved in those series a worse era, against worse teams, and has much less longevity than say KD. I think KD compares quite favourably to Bird tbh, and I rate Bird very highly.

I think you’re right that there’s genuinely more to criticize from Bird in the playoffs than Durant. I still have Bird ahead in all-time ranking, because he simply achieved more and I think that matters. But it’s emblematic of the fact that there’s definitely more low-hanging fruit than Durant when it comes to criticizing players’ playoff performances. Durant isn’t Robinson or Malone either in this regard.

As it relates to this thread, I think Dirk and Durant both have a small number of genuinely bad playoff series, a bunch of playoff series that were merely fine where their team lost, and a small number where they played great and their team lost anyways. They’ve both also played great in title wins—with Durant having two such runs, while Dirk’s one run had a higher margin of difficulty. I see them as pretty comparable in this regard. Playoff performance isn’t a big point of difference for either of them IMO.

[One_and_Done]

Something worth noting is that when KD was in situations where he needed to carry a team, he absolutely showed he could.

In OKC in 2014 in games Westbrook was out the Thunder were 25-11 without him thanks to KD.

Brooklyn was a weird situation due to all the injuries and dramas, but we certainly saw that in normal circumstances KD could carry the Nets, with the high point being that incredible 7 game series vs the Champs. In 21 & 22, the 2 relatively normal seasons, they were 59-31 in games he played.

Even in Phoenix, where he's fallen off a little, the effect of his impact is still clear. KD on the Suns this year: 33-26.
Suns without KD: 2-11

Suns with KD since he arrived: 85-57
Without KD: 14-24

[capfan33]

No one’s disputing his regular season impact and the 21 Brooklyn series is probably his postseason peak.