current/Peak Doncic vs Peak Nowitzki (brought to you by Jason Kidd)

[AdagioPace]

there's a heated debate in the general board over Kidd's words.
Feel free to pick any Dirk season and any Doncic season already available (including this partial one).
I was curious to hear the PC board's opinion.

[AEnigma]

I think that is true offensively. Overall is where I pause. Dirk had his issues defensively in his time, and he would have more issues today than when he played, but Luka is a definite negative. And while I agree the league both has improved and has a general tendency to improve with time, Dirk is not some archaic figure. To take Luka, I think you would need to believe in him as a locked in top five value-generator force, clearly ahead of someone like peak Harden, and I am not sure that tracks quite yet.

[Cavsfansince84]

This comparison is really unfair to Luka until he's 30-32 and has gotten to play on some real contenders. Dirk without the 2011 run at age 33 isn't held in the same regard and he also got to play on another team that made the finals and a 67 win team. Luka's played on some ok teams and even then got one of them to the wcf. Luka as a playoff performer has been really good.

[AEnigma]

This comparison is really unfair to Luka until he's 30-32 and has gotten to play on some real contenders. Dirk without the 2011 run at age 33 isn't held in the same regard and he also got to play on another team that made the finals and a 67 win team. Luka's played on some ok teams and even then got one of them to the wcf. Luka as a playoff performer has been really good.

I do not think there is much to suggest that Luka’s teams without him have been significantly worse than Dirk’s teams were without Dirk.

[Texas Chuck]

Wait its not fair to Luka or are we pretending that Dirk wasn't the one constant in the Mavs winning 50+ every single year and being a legit contender in 4 different seasons with 3 completely different casts?

Never understand why some dismiss players whose teams are good. Like they are the reason the team is good lol.

And Dirk had an MVP 4 years before 2011. People knew he was good. And anyone paying attention knew he was a playoff killer despite some disappointing team results.

[Oscar9992]

Basketball Index have Luka as the best shooter in the league...

[SHAQ32]

Luka wouldn't be the same player in the early-mid 00s

[ShotCreator]

Luka's a little more talented. Really don't believe he's as complete as Dirk was as a two-way player.

There's not too much question to me offensively. Close but clear for Luka. However his scaling up on a talented team is questionable compared to Dirk.

I really wish Luka improved in different ways than he has. His instincts were so unique in his first two years. he's not really built on any of it though. No real identity as a defender and he has tons of mental and physical tools to be a uniquely good one. A little too much of a thrill seeker on offense too. He's been overshooting 3's for 4 straight years now. If he had a Magic/Jokic/LeBron/CP3 mentality where he will beat you over the head with the same redundant but unstoppable actions he'd be better on offense.

[Bloodbather]

I'd say Dončić is the better offensive player at this point because of his enormous playmaking edge. Dirk's ability to space the floor and play off-ball effectively does close the gap somewhat, but not quite.

However, defensive impact complicates the question. Nowitzki was never a good defender, but he was solid in his prime because of his height and positioning. Dončić, on the other hand, is a weak defender, albeit an improved one.

It's a very close call, but I think Dončić needs that signature run in the Playoffs that Dirk has to get the edge. He's been an excellent Playoff performer so far, but that sort of showcase goes far in a comparison like this.

[Cavsfansince84]

I do not think there is much to suggest that Luka’s teams without him have been significantly worse than Dirk’s teams were without Dirk.

I'm not saying there is fwiw. I'm just looking at them as objectively as I can as players and saying a peak that includes a ring or finals is almost always seen as better than a peak which doesn't and so far Luka hasn't played on a real contender yet. Imagine if TMac had won a title in his peak year.

[Cavsfansince84]

Wait its not fair to Luka or are we pretending that Dirk wasn't the one constant in the Mavs winning 50+ every single year and being a legit contender in 4 different seasons with 3 completely different casts?

Never understand why some dismiss players whose teams are good. Like they are the reason the team is good lol.

And Dirk had an MVP 4 years before 2011. People knew he was good. And anyone paying attention knew he was a playoff killer despite some disappointing team results.

Big difference between playing on a 50-53 win team and a team that's seen as a legit contender though. That is the point I was making. Of course Dirk gets credit for those teams being contenders and winning a title but again like I said, he did that after having 10+ years to get it done and had enough talent to win 67 games one year which takes a very good roster unless its like 09 LeBron. Luka so far hasn't played on that kind of team yet despite being widely seen as a top 5 player for the last few years. Don't take it as a knock on Dirk. We already saw Luka drag a team to the wcf that had no real business being there.

[Doctor MJ]

there's a heated debate in the general board over Kidd's words.
Feel free to pick any Dirk season and any Doncic season already available (including this partial one).
I was curious to hear the PC board's opinion.

Dirk, and frankly I don't think it says good things at all when a coach says his young star is already better than the best player in franchise history while that young star and his team are still figuring out how to actually achieve excellence.

It would be bad enough if the coach simply was too excited to be objective, but to me Kidd saying Luka > Dirk was the "safe" answer for a coach who recognizes his star has more power than he does, and I'd rather see a coach who talks in terms of the progress that still needs to be made.

Now granted, it's a delicate question to have to answer, but I think at the very least you can say something like "There's still a long ways to go" which implies that he's not necessarily finding fault with his star in public.

[LukaTheGOAT]

I guess I'll be the first person here to say Luka.

Fun fact:

Luka shoots 38% on catch and shoot jumpers since start of last season. He is at 41% this season. He might have more off-ball capabilities then the general consensus, even though he hasn't show much as an off-ball mover.

[tsherkin]

Dirk, and frankly I don't think it says good things at all when a coach says his young star is already better than the best player in franchise history while that young star and his team are still figuring out how to actually achieve excellence.

I'd love to hear more of the "why Dirk > Luka" and less of "blah blah Jason Kidd."

Statistically, Dirk is less effective than Luka on offense by a variety of measures, though he did also lead his league in a couple of offensive markers. Generally speaking, though Luka shows through better and Dirk wasn't exactly a defensive savant himself. And of course that makes sense, since Luka is a CONSIDERABLY superior playmaker compared to Dirk, who largely didn't impede the flow of the offense while also being an outstanding scoring force. Both playoff risers, no pro-Dirk advantage there.

So aside from winning bias, what's the pro-Dirk argument here?

[Texas Chuck]

Winning isn't bias. It's the point. I mean Dirk can't approach Luka for Stat accumulation. But all his teams did was win. And the roster turned over a ton and after Nash left there was no costar. And Dirk was super durable but even in the title year the team could do nothing without him.

Dirk was not just a scorer. Sucks that's still being implied.

Sent from my SM-A136U using RealGM mobile app

[eminence]

Dirk. Middling margin. Dirk a consistent top 5 guy who had a few seasons seriously challenging for the crown. Luka more of a consistent top 10 guy who's had a season or two challenging for top 5.

Most everything that isn't on-ball offense goes Dirks way, and Dirk wasn't exactly a slouch with the ball in his hands. Even someone with as massive of on-ball role as Luka still only has the ball ~30% of his time on the court (Dirk probably closer to 20%).

Better shooter, better moving off the ball, better on the glass, better defender (though I'm not exactly a fan of Dirk's defense).

[OhayoKD]

there's a heated debate in the general board over Kidd's words.
Feel free to pick any Dirk season and any Doncic season already available (including this partial one).
I was curious to hear the PC board's opinion.

By direct comparison it's Luka. By indirect comparison(era-relativity) its dirk

Dirk was not just a scorer. Sucks that's still being implied.

You drawing it out of thin-air does not mean it was implied. Just like "impact data is a deciding element in this comparison" does not mean "on/off is gospel" unless you're deliberately fishing for that.

[OhayoKD]

Dirk. Middling margin. Dirk a consistent top 5 guy who had a few seasons seriously challenging for the crown. Luka more of a consistent top 10 guy who's had a season or two challenging for top 5.

Depends on how you weigh the playoffs vs RS. Hard to say luka's play has ever not been top 5 at least in the postseason I think(at least per-game).

[Masigond]

Doncic is easily the better individual player. But as NBA basketball is 5 on 5, things get a little different, even without taking the defense into account. You could plug Nowitzki on almost every team (I think the only somewhat ill-fitting team was when the Mavs went into panic mode after Dirk's injury-ridden 2003 WC Finals series and traded for Jamison and Walker, forcing at least one of the three playing out of their best position). He's a great option to run your offense through, he's great off the ball and most important: He doesn't demand the ball much and has a lot of gravity nevertheless, thus making the game easy for his teammates. So easy that you didn't even need an exceptional playmaker to have this team have a superb offense (see 05-06 with Terry and Devin Harris who were far from being players like Nash or Kidd regarding the creating for their teammates). You can easily see Dirk playing up to his strengths at the side of every center imaginable from Shaq to an offensive scrub.

I think that a heliocentric player takes away a bit from his teammates. Take LeBron as an example who had his superstar teammates like Wade and especially Bosh having to adapt. Both had quite comfortably better individual seasons than at his side. I guess that it's somewhat the same with Doncic. Only very specialized players are able to realize their full potential playing aside him.

So overall I tend to Dirk being the better player to build around for the Mavericks. But when a heliocentric player is as good as Doncic, it gets close.

[OhayoKD]

I think that a heliocentric player takes away a bit from his teammates. Take LeBron as an example who had his superstar teammates like Wade and especially Bosh having to adapt. Both had quite comfortably better individual seasons than at his side. I guess that it's somewhat the same with Doncic. Only very specialized players are able to realize their full potential playing aside him.

Playing with similar players takes a little bit away from said players. But Helios are the most proven offensive archetype in terms of

A. Generating top-level results
B. Retaining impact across contexts

If Luka is better at 1 v 1 basketball, then he is much better at 5 v 5 basketball as he's levels above Dirk as a passer and ball-handler. Thea rgument for Dirk is soley his 1 v 1 scoring prowess, and rebounding, and defense generating more impact in the periods they respectively played. Ball dominance = bad does not reflect reality or the history of the sport:

Spoiler:

Curry:
2015 +4 (RS) +4.1(PS)
2016 +7.9(RS)+5.7(PS)
2017 +6.8(RS)+11.6 (PS)
2018 + 5.0(RS)+6.5(PS)
2019 + 5.5(RS)+5.4 (PS)
average: 5.85 (RS) 6.6(PS)
combined average: +6.2

Lebron
2013 +6.4 (RS) +7.2 (PS)
2014 +4.2 (RS) +10.6 (PS)
2015 +5.5(RS) +5.5 (PS)
2016 +4.5(RS) +12.5 (PS)
2017 +4.8 (RS) +13.7 (PS)
Average +5.1(RS) +9.9 (PS)
combined average: +7.5

jordan* (i had to use his first 5 championship seasons)
1991 +6.7(RS) +11.7 (PS)
1992 +7.3(RS) +6.5 (PS)
1993 +4.9 (RS) +9.8 (PS)
1996 +7.6 (RS) +8.6 (PS)
1997 +7.7(RS) +6.5(PS)
average +6.85 (RS) +8.6(PS)
combined average:+7.7

nash

2005 suns. +8.4(RS) +17 (PS)
2006 suns +5.3(RS) +9.5 (PS)
2007 suns +7.4(RS)+7.6 (PS)
2008 suns. +5.8(RS) + 3.1 (PS)
2010 suns +7.7(RS) +13.4 (PS)
Average +6.9(RS) + 10.1 (PS)
combined average: +8.5

shaq

1998 +6.9(RS), +10.1(PS)
1999 +5.4(RS), +4.7(PS)
2000 +3.2(RS), +9.3(PS)
2001 +5.4 (RS) +13.6(PS)
2002 +4.9(RS), +6.4 (PS)
Average +5.2(RS) +8.8(PS)
combined average: +7

bird

1984 +3.3 (RS) +6.4 (PS)
1985 +4.9 (RS) +3.9 (PS)
1986 +4.6 (RS) + 8.3 (PS)
1987 +5.2 (RS) + 8.7 (PS)
1988 +7.4 (RS) +4.2 (PS)
average +5.1(RS) +6.3(PS)
combined average: +5.7

magic

1986 +6.1(RS) +6.7
1987 +7.6 (RS) +10.7
1988 +5.1(RS) +8.3
1989 +6 (RS) +9.3
1990 +5.9(RS) +8.4
Average +6.1(RS), + 8.7 (PS)
combined average: +7.4

<@542858745827557376>

It's just copium for people who can't support their aesthetic preferences with actual results

Luka wouldn't be the same player in the early-mid 00s

You're right. He'd be much better