RealGM 2023 Top 100 Project - #18 (Dirk Nowitzki)

[iggymcfrack]

Looking at my big board I'm a little generous with the last few KD years, but even having them as a weak MVP value, I still think KD has the highest peak of the current group.

Looking at KD's scoring

Could you show me your breakdown for Durant and Julius? Mine are completely different.

KD

MVP: 13, 14, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21 (short rs, great ps)
Weak MVP: 12
All NBA: 10, 11, 22, 23
All-star: 09

Dr J

MVP: 76
Weak MVP: 73, 74, 75, 77, 80, 81, 82, 83
All NBA: 78, 79, 84
All Star: 72, 85

Even if you put 21 as an All NBA level due to missed games in rs, I still have KD ahead.

In what universe is finishing 8th in the MVP vote and missing half the playoffs hurt or missing the majority of the regular season and getting knocked out in the second round an MVP-level season?

[One_and_Done]

I have a hard time thinking that in today's league a team prefers CP3 to Dr J. Erving is basically the prototype for the modern star. CP3 is a great player, but his size limits him to a degree, and his playoff record shows some of his limitations.

That 1976 season Erving had looks better than any season Paul ever had.

[therealbig3]

I’m not convinced at all that Durant is the superior player or that he peaked higher than Dirk. What’s the argument for it, statistically speaking?

[70sFan]

I’m not convinced at all that Durant is the superior player or that he peaked higher than Dirk. What’s the argument for it, statistically speaking?

Box score numbers favor Durant, impact metrics favor Dirk. Skillset analysis isn't conclusive to me. I fail to understand how can anyone say that one player peaked higher than the other without any doubt.

[Joao Saraiva]

Vote Karl Malone
Alternate Dirk Nowiztki
Nomination John Stockton

It's time. Karl Malone has a regular season career that is top 10 all time.

He was a great offensive anchor, a very solid man to man defender.

His scoring ability grew during his career as the Jazz were later able to operate trough him in the post. Very reliable midrange scorer, ferocious attacking the rim and a menace in the open court. For the ones that say he relied on Stockton... well, Stockton was going downhill in 98 and he almost delivered us a championship, playing two of his most superb games in G5 and G6 of the 98 finals.

I understand he has some playoff drop in some cases, but let's not make it seem it was always like that. 92, 94, 98 are examples of superb campaigns.

He's the only guy left with a longevity in the realm of LeBron, KAJ and Duncan. And since that was clearly a factor before I think we should give Malone a spot here.

He was a jerk off the court... yes. But we're not judging that here, right?

For those asking about the lack of a ring while Malone and Stockton played together...

- Stockton and Malone didn't peak at the same time. Stockton was at his best in the late 80s and early 90s while Malone developed into a more reliable #1 option later in the 90s;

- Utah didn't have good depth for most of the time, and casts that were kind of meh. Yes we added Horny at some point and it helped but things didn't go right ultimately in the two finals we got into;

- Stockton and Malone had success. The continuos good/great RS runs along with some deep playoff runs fall a bit short on what the Spurs did, but it's not a lot diferent overall when he think of a team being consistently good. Ultimately we didn't win a ring, and sometimes I can fault Malone for that or Stockton, but in other runs they displayed at all time level. It's not like it was a James Harden type of collapse every time;

- We ran into better teams and we still provided a great fight. Took LA to 7 in 88 and Stockton actually outplayed Magic Johnson. We lost some competitive series years later and ultimately we did lose against one of the best teams ever in the 97 Bulls - altough I can fault Malone for that one. In 98 we could have won but G6 just didn't go our way for a lot of reasons.

I wonder what diferent type of perception we would have on Malone and Stockton if MJ's shot didn't go in and we eventually beat them in G7 or something.

I believe Stockton and Maloen were great for a long long time, unfortunately the apex was not a ring for several reasons that I don't think fall into them completely.

But feel free to vote otherwise.

[One_and_Done]

I don't thibk Stockton should even bs top 50 tbh.

[trex_8063]

I'd also note that Dirk's Mavs never had to face a team as good as EITHER of the '96 or '97 Bulls.

1) I would put the 2014 Spurs on par with the 1997 Bulls, but assuming you mean prime, sure. Nevertheless, Malone regularly lost to worse teams than that, and he did not perform well in those Finals.

2) You have said this twice now, so I suppose it bears correcting: the 1996 Jazz were eliminated before the Finals after Malone went 8/22 from the field and 5/10 from the line in a four-point Game 7 loss.

Re:#1, I guess I was referring to years they were legitimately contending.

Re:#2
Yikes, that’s embarrassing. You are of course correct. I meant to mention the ‘96 Sonics, but somehow got my wires crossed. I’m surprised it took this long for someone to notice and point it out.

[Joao Saraiva]

I don't thibk Stockton should even bs top 50 tbh.

I can't understand him not being ranked among the top 35. But that is what I believe, obviously we value diferent things.

[Joao Saraiva]

For the guys saying Malone played bad on some losses... I'll give you that. He did.

But it's not always the case, we're not talking about a guy who always did that.

We actually have a ton of series where he played well in the decisive games and entire series with him being the best scorer in almost any game at good ts%.

92 playoffs were amazing for example. Even in a 4 1 defeat he was actually the best player of the series.

I think some people are kind of putting a ton of weight in his not so good games or series but forgetting the ones he performed great (wins and losses).

[Clyde Frazier]

I don't thibk Stockton should even bs top 50 tbh.

Well that sounds pretty unreasonable. Why?

[iggymcfrack]

I don't thibk Stockton should even bs top 50 tbh.

You just don’t care about impact stats at all, do you? Even from ages 34-40, Stockton had exceptional impact data that would put him up there with the very top players we have measured and well ahead of guys like Kobe and KD. Even on a skills analysis, I’d say the edge in passing, playmaking, and longevity would naturally overwhelm KD’s edge in scoring and rebounding.

[therealbig3]

I’m not convinced at all that Durant is the superior player or that he peaked higher than Dirk. What’s the argument for it, statistically speaking?

Box score numbers favor Durant, impact metrics favor Dirk. Skillset analysis isn't conclusive to me. I fail to understand how can anyone say that one player peaked higher than the other without any doubt.

If anything, I'm much more comfortable taking Dirk based on the impact data and the fact that he demonstrated a resilience against playoff defenses without another MVP-level player that KD never really did.

Like I said in the peak comparison thread between the two, there's a difference between what KD CAN do relative to Dirk and what it's actually worth him doing relative to Dirk. I think outside of the 17-19 run with GS which clearly had some confounding factors that boosted KD's efficiency, the things that both are actually elite at, Dirk was simply better at. Yeah, KD can be more of a PG for your team than Dirk could...but he's nowhere near effective enough at that to actually warrant featuring that. He's a better defender than Dirk, it's true, but not for his entire career, he only became a good defender a little bit later, and even then, he's still prone to ball watching and mental lapses that Dirk didn't really do because he was more fundamentally sound. Furthermore, KD tended to get broken down off the dribble a lot actually.

I don't really see enough of a difference on defense between the two to really justify to me taking KD over Dirk when I have much more confidence in Dirk's offensive ability.

[HeartBreakKid]

I'm actually in the minority who thinks Stockton was roughly equal to Malone and the last list I made I had them right next to each other.

So yes, Stockton is going well with in my top 50.

[HeartBreakKid]

Been out for a few threads, ready to reengage.

Open question: what’s the biggest argument against Chris Paul here? At 10 it’s tough, but now I think he’s clearly better than the remainder of the players at his best, and has put together an impressive book of longevity. He’s been overrated the last couple years, but I wouldn’t be caught dead taking Dirk or Durant over him to start a team, let along the older guys.

Am I missing something?

I think his injuries can make some of his seasons feel incomplete and thus inconclusive.

Otherwise, you're right. I think CP3 has a pretty good argument against anyone here. Could certainly argue he is the best player,


CP3 vs Nowitzki on offense is an interesting argument. Logic should say that CP3 is the better offensive player if just for being one of the goat handlers and passers (among many other things he does well).

[Joao Saraiva]

I'm actually in the minority who thinks Stockton was roughly equal to Malone and the last list I made I had them right next to each other.

So yes, Stockton is going well with in my top 50.

Peak vs peak I'm with you. Unfortunately the latest years for Stockton were on reduced minutes, while Malone was still the focal point on offense. For me that brings Malone's longevity to a diferent level than Stockton's.

I'd also like to state that perception of Malone being a choker and Stockton not is not accurate. Malone and Stockton both have their down games/series when we were eliminated, and I'm not even sure I'd blame Malone more on those than Stockton.

[One_and_Done]

Stockton was an all-star/all-nba type guard, not a star. The stars are who we ahould be discussing now. If PJ Tucker had really high impact stats should I rank him top 100? The answer is pretty obvious. You can't build a contending team around Stockton as the best player.

[Colbinii]

Stockton was an all-star/all-nba type guard, not a star. The stars are who we ahould be discussing now. If PJ Tucker had really high impact stats should I rank him top 100? The answer is pretty obvious. You can't build a contending team around Stockton as the best player.

I consider Bobby Jones a Top 100 player and wouldn't build around him per-se.

[HeartBreakKid]

I'm considering switching one of my votes to CP3 now.

[Joao Saraiva]

Stockton was an all-star/all-nba type guard, not a star. The stars are who we ahould be discussing now. If PJ Tucker had really high impact stats should I rank him top 100? The answer is pretty obvious. You can't build a contending team around Stockton as the best player.

If he had the record of assists in NBA history, steals in NBA history, high impact stats, a great win%, great longevity, fantastic shooting and all time series where he outplayed Magic for example... well then you might want to consider him in the top 30, let alone top 100.

Let's not pretend Stockton isn't an unique type of player. He's a 9 time assist champion. He lead the playoffs in APG 10 times. He was a 60ts% type of guy before guys jacked up a ton of 3s, so he was definitely efficient. He definitely belongs in the conversation.

If you can build a contender arround Nash you can definitely build a contender arround Stockton.

And you can argue Stockton was our best player from 88 to 92.

[Gibson22]

Vote: Dirk
Alternate: Malone

Out of those guys my list would be: dirk malone kd erving paul. But truthfully have pettit and moses over paul. I think i have about 24 tier a players. I think that kd and dirk had similar impact at their peak, id lean dirk slightly superior, but it is what it is, meaning that dirk and malone's longevity do it.

Nominations: Pettit
Alternate: Malone

I think its really important that pettit gets nominated. he's, with malone, the last player left that was the best player in basketball at least for a season, and pettit was the actual best player in the world pre russell. He was a top 5 player for 10 years, he was the best in 57 and 58, yeah. he should absolutely be above guys like paul and barkley. he's 12th in our poty shares. honestly i don't see why he should be so far below robertson and west. they have a bit of longevity over him, but they aren't that far apart as far as eras and they have about the same level of importance in the league hierarchy throughout their careers, with them not being ever the clear cut best players in basketball like mikan was before bill and wilt took over.

With malone the situation is similar. there are concerns about his impact and longevity, but he won a title as the guy and he bridged as the best player in the world over bird, magic, erving, kareem in 82 and 83 before bird and then magic and then jordan took over and after kareem