RealGM

Higher on the goats list?

I see zero case for Dirk.

Your comparisons are so random.

This is actually something I don't recall ever seeing before anywhere.

On the internet, where everything gets recycled, that's saying something.

Though I'm not sure what prompted a comparison of these two particular players.

ThaRegul8r wrote:This is actually something I don't recall ever seeing before anywhere.

On the internet, where everything gets recycled, that's saying something.

Though I'm not sure what prompted a comparison of these two particular players.

There's a first time for everything.

I love Dirk but this is clearly Wilt.

My initial, gut reaction is Wilt, but I will say that I have hardened my stance on Wilt slightly while softening my stance on Dirk. I haven't changed enough to switch, but I wouldn't call it implausible.

According to my tiering:

Jordan/Kareem/Duncan/Russell/Lebron/KG

Magic/Shaq/Hakeem/Wilt/Oscar

and Dirk is knocking on that Magic tier, so it's closer than one would think.

micahclay wrote:My initial, gut reaction is Wilt, but I will say that I have hardened my stance on Wilt slightly while softening my stance on Dirk. I haven't changed enough to switch, but I wouldn't call it implausible.

According to my tiering:

Jordan/Kareem/Duncan/Russell/Lebron/KG

Magic/Shaq/Hakeem/Wilt/Oscar

and Dirk is knocking on that Magic tier, so it's closer than one would think.

Agreeing with micah here, only one tier apart on my lists as well, wouldn't take some earth-shattering change of heart to have them close to equal.

But anywho, Wilt for me, peak notably higher in my book, and similar enough longevity for that to be the difference.

I think Wilt is the best player ever.

What is wrong with this board? I am one of the biggest Dirk homers and I have Chamberlain ahead by at least 10 if not 15 spots. This is not even funny anymore how this board tries to diminish Wilt.

Pg81 wrote:What is wrong with this board? I am one of the biggest Dirk homers and I have Chamblerain ahead at least 10 if not 15 spots. This is not even funny anymore how this board tries to diminish Wilt.

Lol. I expected you to defend Dirk. I feel Wilt would be a headache to have as your franchise players. Switching through as many coaches as he did along with the ego issues, etc. Not taking Dirk over him, but I expect someone to go with Dirk here.

Fundamentals21 wrote:

Pg81 wrote:What is wrong with this board? I am one of the biggest Dirk homers and I have Chamblerain ahead at least 10 if not 15 spots. This is not even funny anymore how this board tries to diminish Wilt.

Lol. I expected you to defend Dirk. I feel Wilt would be a headache to have as your franchise players. Switching through as many coaches as he did along with the ego issues, etc. Not taking Dirk over him, but I expect someone to go with Dirk here.

There were plenty of players who would have been a headache for many coaches, like Russell and MJ. People just do not see it because there is little to butt head with when you are on a successful team and do not have to change your playstyle drastically.
Imagine what MJ would have done if Jackson would have forced him to be a pass first pg or a solely defensive SG or SF.
Russell also had a nasty temper. The only reason he did not butt heads with Auerbach was because the Celtics kept winning and Auerbach was great at keeping egos in check.
I might be a Dirk homer, but not a wholly unreasonable one. The only "unreasonable" stance I have is that Dirk was, slighyly, better than KG and there is nothing to sway me on that position. Then again I do not have a problem with people ranking KG higher.

Wilt for me. Defensive difference is gigantic and I think people start to underrate Wilt's offensive capabilities.

I can see very small case for Dirk, but I don't buy it.

Wilt has started to become seriously underrated on this board. I think the talk of him not maximizing his impact until the Sixers days is casting a shadow on just how utterly unstoppable he was.

The argument for Dirk would be that he played in such a way that maximized his team's ability to win, in a way that Wilt didn't always do, and that Dirk played that way for a much longer time period than Wilt did.

Wilt was better at almost all of the individual elements of basketball than Dirk...he was bigger, stronger, faster, had a better low-post scoring game, was a more dominant rebounder, a more dominant shot-blocker, demonstrated that he could operate as a high-post offensive hub, demonstrated that he could operate as a defense-first monster, etc. When it came down to it, Wilt could choose to dominate in just about any given way.

However, the criticism of Wilt was that he often seemed to choose to dominate for a particular statistic, as opposed to putting his ridiculous toolbox together in ways that helped his team win. Obviously, it's a much debated and contested idea around here. But, for the sake of this thread, if one buys into the concept that WIlt's video game numbers (especially his scoring) didn't translate to tangibly improving his team's offense and/or overall team strength the way that other all-time greats did, then it leaves an opening for players that aren't/weren't as individually talented but that DID play in more effective ways.

Dirk's high efficiency scoring style, with the unique style of a 7-footer that could operate in the paint but could just as easily face-up and operate from behind the arc off the dribble (more like a traditional wing) gives him mechanisms of offensive impact that Wilt, despite his gaudy scoring numbers, could never really replicate. Even at much lower volumes of individual scoring, Dirk's offensive presence had a huge positive impact on his teammates. Teammates could operate at relatively high individual capacity, because Dirk's style wasn't ball dominant nor did it require that the offense be structured completely around his strengths. And, his ability to space the floor and create gravity that pulled opponents away from both the rim and his teammates allowed Dirk to influence his team's offensive efficiency in a very positive way on every possession he was in the game, whether he was directly involved in the play or not.

Wilt, at his best, was clearly better than Dirk. Especially when he put together dominant defensive seasons and channeled his incredible gifts into offensive feats that allowed his teammates to thrive as well. But, the argument for Dirk would rest on his impact maintaining that expected superstar level year-in and year-out for a very long career, while Wilt had incredible impact peaks but also had too many years where his gaudy stats didn't seem to move the needle for his team as much as one would have expected.

SlowPaced wrote:Wilt has started to become seriously underrated on this board. I think the talk of him not maximizing his impact until the Sixers days is casting a shadow on just how utterly unstoppable he was.

Yeah this right here. I mean if we're splitting hairs for GOAT with Mike/Russ/LeBron/Kareem then that can be considered. But putting him at #10 or something because he doesn't have a fistful of titles is silly.

Who were the 4 Dirk Stan/Wilt haters who voted Dirk?

I voted for Dirk. Thinking about it, question is basically "who would you rather draft as a rookie" and I prefer Nowitzki for career. Beside intangibles, Wilt was too mediocre on offense and too inconsistent on defense, but it is close either way.

drza wrote:The argument for Dirk would be that he played in such a way that maximized his team's ability to win, in a way that Wilt didn't always do, and that Dirk played that way for a much longer time period than Wilt did.

Wilt was better at almost all of the individual elements of basketball than Dirk...he was bigger, stronger, faster, had a better low-post scoring game, was a more dominant rebounder, a more dominant shot-blocker, demonstrated that he could operate as a high-post offensive hub, demonstrated that he could operate as a defense-first monster, etc. When it came down to it, Wilt could choose to dominate in just about any given way.

However, the criticism of Wilt was that he often seemed to choose to dominate for a particular statistic, as opposed to putting his ridiculous toolbox together in ways that helped his team win. Obviously, it's a much debated and contested idea around here. But, for the sake of this thread, if one buys into the concept that WIlt's video game numbers (especially his scoring) didn't translate to tangibly improving his team's offense and/or overall team strength the way that other all-time greats did, then it leaves an opening for players that aren't/weren't as individually talented but that DID play in more effective ways.

Dirk's high efficiency scoring style, with the unique style of a 7-footer that could operate in the paint but could just as easily face-up and operate from behind the arc off the dribble (more like a traditional wing) gives him mechanisms of offensive impact that Wilt, despite his gaudy scoring numbers, could never really replicate. Even at much lower volumes of individual scoring, Dirk's offensive presence had a huge positive impact on his teammates. Teammates could operate at relatively high individual capacity, because Dirk's style wasn't ball dominant nor did it require that the offense be structured completely around his strengths. And, his ability to space the floor and create gravity that pulled opponents away from both the rim and his teammates allowed Dirk to influence his team's offensive efficiency in a very positive way on every possession he was in the game, whether he was directly involved in the play or not.

Wilt, at his best, was clearly better than Dirk. Especially when he put together dominant defensive seasons and channeled his incredible gifts into offensive feats that allowed his teammates to thrive as well. But, the argument for Dirk would rest on his impact maintaining that expected superstar level year-in and year-out for a very long career, while Wilt had incredible impact peaks but also had too many years where his gaudy stats didn't seem to move the needle for his team as much as one would have expected.

That is an excellent point about players that may not produce the numbers but influence their teams in a positive manner.

I do think Dirk was a positive all the time but not enough to overcome Wilt, but I do think that can be a point for those who raise a teams ceiling i.e. Magic, Russell

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using RealGM mobile app