RealGM Top 100 List #16

[penbeast0]

Again, breaking it down by position

CENTERS
David Robinson to me is the best left in terms of peak. Moses has great longevity though and the third possibility is George Mikan who is the only player left that was the undisputed best player in basketball for a reasonably long stretch of time (5 years +). I rate Robinson higher at the moment because Moses's defense is solid on ball but he isn't a defensive anchor and defensive anchors like the Admiral (anchor, Admiral, oh never mind) tend to have an impact out of proportion to their numbers. I think you win more titles with DRob than with Moses despite Moses's longevity advantage.

FORWARDS
Karl Malone is the obvious choice in terms of numbers, durability, everything but postseason success; although I have seen Dirk, Pettit, Barkley, and even Rodman rated over him by various posters.

GUARDS
Wade or Frazier. Wade is the most explosive scorer and plays excellent defense, Frazier didn't score as much but was an even better defender and playmaker, and even more known for stepping up and dominating 2 NBA finals. This one is very close; I lean Frazier over West but willing to be convinced. I see Clyde as a step up over Nash and Stockton for his ability to take over games with both his scoring and defense, over Payton, Kidd, or Isiah for his scoring efficiency and superior all around game. Both Wade and Frazier do suffer a little from short or injury riddled primes.

Right now, I am leaning to Karl Malone from all the debate but willing to change.

[ronnymac2]

Vote: Karl Malone

I'm voting for Karl Malone because he gives me the best chance to win over the course of his career. He gives you many options as far as how to build your team because he's above average or strong in many areas. You've got many great years with him as either a top-tier superstar or an ultra-portable role player. In his prime, he can take on an enormous usage — as high as some of our finest offensive wings — and drive strong offenses, even against formidable defenses in the playoffs.

Karl Malone has also faced the GOAT competition of pretty much anybody ever. He's faced every great PF except for Bob Pettit. Nowitzki, Garnett, Barkley, Duncan, McHale, Rodman, Webber, Brand, O'Neal, Wallace, and Kemp. Getting into the next-tier PFs of his prime era like Horace Grant, Otis Thorpe, Buck Williams, Charles Oakley, Larry Nance, Cliff Robinson, and Antonio McDyess. He faced them all. Pretty impressive in my opinion.

[Basketballefan]

Again, breaking it down by position

CENTERS
David Robinson to me is the best left in terms of peak. Moses has great longevity though and the third possibility is George Mikan who is the only player left that was the undisputed best player in basketball for a reasonably long stretch of time (5 years +). I rate Robinson higher at the moment because Moses's defense is solid on ball but he isn't a defensive anchor and defensive anchors like the Admiral (anchor, Admiral, oh never mind) tend to have an impact out of proportion to their numbers. I think you win more titles with DRob than with Moses despite Moses's longevity advantage.

FORWARDS
Karl Malone is the obvious choice in terms of numbers, durability, everything but postseason success; although I have seen Dirk, Pettit, Barkley, and even Rodman rated over him by various posters.

GUARDS
Wade or Frazier. Wade is the most explosive scorer and plays excellent defense, Frazier didn't score as much but was an even better defender and playmaker, and even more known for stepping up and dominating 2 NBA finals. This one is very close; I lean Frazier over West but willing to be convinced. I see Clyde as a step up over Nash and Stockton for his ability to take over games with both his scoring and defense, over Payton, Kidd, or Isiah for his scoring efficiency and superior all around game. Both Wade and Frazier do suffer a little from short or injury riddled primes.

Right now, I am leaning to Karl Malone from all the debate but willing to change.

In what Way is Frazier a more dominant finals performer than prime Wade?

For a start, Frazier dominated 2 finals, Wade only dominated 1. Also, in addition to dominating offensively, Frazier shut down Jerry West defensively; just a super dominant performance at both ends (by a player I hated at the time; bloody Knicks).

[trex_8063]

Vote for #16: Karl Malone.

Reasons......

Analytic interpretation:

Spoiler:

I want to talk about the Mailman because he hasn't quite gotten the amount of representation that other players on this level have received. I voted for KG in this thread, so this isn't exactly my argument for Malone, but it's information and a perspective. I invite you to receive it and then do what you feel.

Early Years

Malone emerged as a 20-10 threat in his 2nd year in the league, but it was his 3rd year in 1988 where you can see the quantum leap to being a legit star player. Utah was the best defense in the NBA (their strength being eFG% Against) thanks to Mark Eaton's dominant defense.

Malone certainly helped though. He led the team in defensive rebound rate (10th in the NBA that year) and was named All-Defense Second Team. He also averaged 27 points on 52 percent shooting and got to the free throw line almost 10 times per game (56.8 percent True Shooting..Got his FT shooting up to 70 percent this year).

Then in the playoffs, Utah faces the defending champion LA Lakers (#3 in SRS at 4.81) and loses in 7 games, with Malone dropping 28.7 points and 11.7 rebounds on 53.5% TS. Malone seemed able to handle LA's defense better as the series wore on, putting up 27/11 (10/20 FG, 7/7 FT) in a Game 6 Elimination Game victory, and 31/15 (14/21 FG, 3/9 FT) in a Game 7 Loss.

Early-years Malone...from say 1987-1991...looks like prime Amar'e Stoudemire with slightly less offense but MUCH better defense and rebounding. Amar'e was built like a SF; Malone was built like a mack truck and actually pursued defensive rebounds. Early Malone turned the ball over more than prime Amar'e and didn't score quite as efficiently, but Amar'e got to play C and had a ton of shooters next to him while Malone had a giant negative at C (Eaton was a horrendous offensive player and clogged the paint) and did not have as much shooting around him. The only constant is Nash and Stockton were great at feeding the bigs.

Around '91-'93, Malone's passing from the mid-post, off the pick-n-roll, and with his back-to-the-basket improved to the point that it made his offensive utility greatly outstrip anything Amar'e has ever been capable of providing on that end. Mind you, Malone remained a strong defensive rebounder and defensive player.

RAPM

I've seen questions regarding Malone's longevity based on his RAPM scores post-1998. I get the impression that the skepticism is not extreme by any means, but more along the lines of "Malone does indeed have excellent longevity, but the boxscore stats saying he's a 20+ PPG player post-98 hide the fact that he most certainly is not a strong fulcrum for a successful team in a 20+ PPG role, and that he cannot provide significant lift in this role, which seems to be the only way Malone can be utilized."

Compared to somebody like KG, Malone does indeed look like he ages far less gracefully based on RAPM.

The way I see it, however, is that as Malone's body and raw talent declined, his role did not change. His coach did not change. His minutes and games played did not change. His USG remained high when on the court.

Here is KG's and KM's scoring average, MPG, and USG relative to other's on their respective teams from 1996-2003 and 2006-2013. I chose these years because we get to see when each was a prime-time MPG/USG/Scorer and see how they get to decline from that level.

Kevin Garnett

2006: 21.8 points (1st), 38.9 minutes (2nd) 25.5 USG% (1st)
2007: 22.4 points (1st), 39.4 minutes (1st), 27.4 USG% (1st)
2008: 18.8 points (2nd), 32.8 minutes (3rd), 25.5 USG% (1st)
2009: 15.8 points (3rd), 31.1 minutes (4th), 23.4 USG% (2nd)
2010: 14.3 points (3rd), 29.9 minutes (4th), 22.1 USG% (2nd)
2011: 14.9 points (3rd), 31.3 minutes (4th), 22.3 USG% (2nd)
2012: 15.8 points (2nd), 31.1 minutes (5th), 24.9 USG% (2nd)
2013: 14.8 points (2nd), 29.7 minutes (3rd), 24.5 USG% (2nd)

**Garnett missed 92 games over this timespan.

Karl Malone

1996: 25.7 points (1st), 38 minutes (1st), 29.8 USG% (1st)
1997: 27.4 points(1st), 36.6 minutes (1st), 32.7 USG% (1st)
1998: 27 points(1st), 37.4 minutes (1st), 31.8 USG% (1st)
1999: 23.8 points (1st), 37.4 minutes (1st), 30.5 USG% (1st)
2000: 25.5 points (1st), 35.9 minutes (1st), 31.9 USG% (1st)
2001: 23.2 points (1st), 35.7 minutes (1st), 30 USG% (1st)
2002: 22.4 points (1st), 38 minutes (1st), 28.8 USG% (1st)
2003: 20.6 points (1st), 36.2 minutes (1st), 27.8 USG% (1st)

**Malone missed 6 games over this timespan.

Malone is giving superstar PPG, USG, and MPG, but not superstar impact for the Utah Jazz. It's fair to question why Malone's role/minutes did not change if he wasn't capable of providing significant lift after 1998. My response to this would be:

1. Malone was healthy. No reason to manage minutes any differently based on injury concerns.
2. The team clearly did not have a Plan B. Malone certainly wasn't holding a burgeoning star back. This clearly wasn't a team in any of these years where Sloan could pull a Pop and platoon guys and find equal or superior success. Whatever lift Malone was capable of providing for 35+ minutes was necessary to make the playoffs, in reality and in the eyes of Coach Sloan.
3. Stockton/Malone worked in Sloan's system in the REG SEA for over a decade. Changing things up would have been a huge adjustment for all parties involved and quite risky (likely not successful either in my opinion).

This should not be read as an indictment on Kevin Garnett. KG's focus was (correctly) pushed to the defensive side in his later years, and he excelled in a way that Malone wouldn't have defensively even if Malone were put in an optimal setting. This is actually part of the reason why I vote KG in this thread.

This should be read as an explanation for why Malone's decline might look more precipitous as measured by RAPM than it actually was. Malone didn't get to specialize or decrease his role/minutes the way KG and David Robinson and his teammate John Stockton did in their decline years.

Of course the counter to this is that Malone's skillset doesn't allow him to specialize in anything but volume scoring. To that, I must emphatically disagree. Cut his skillset down to the bone and he's very much a Horace Grant type...a mini-Kevin Garnett actually. KG/Horace/older Malone connect the goodness/impact of the players around them because of their spacing effect, passing, screens, off-ball movement, ability to run the floor, and IQ.

Despite being 40, and despite being oft-injured, I'd argue that Karl Malone, like Horace Grant in 1995, was the most valuable player on the 2004 Los Angeles Lakers. HoGrant and Malone were the third-best players, but the most valuable based on the team construction (Though Penny could be argued for Orlando because the Magic had no PG). Malone gave Kobe his first great pick-n-roll partner and gave Shaq the best or second-best entry-passing big man he ever played next to. And Malone's man defense in the 2004 playoffs was amazing, as he stifled Yao Ming, Tim Duncan, Kevin Garnett, and Rasheed Wallace by shoving them 20 feet away from the basket, beating up on them, and stripping them cleanly of the ball or making them take tough shots. Even at age 40 and injured for half the season, 2004 Malone proved to me that 1999-2003 Malone could have shifted his role from volume scorer to role playing big man and been extremely impactful and great on a contending team.

A look at the common playoff narrative, broken down by Elgee:

Spoiler:

Yeah, I could have sworn watching those Jazz teams that the pick and roll with the mailman was the start of their flex offense and that all of their other stuff fed off of that.

I don't mean that, in general, Malone was bad for their offense. I mean the way that he performed in the playoffs put a serious damper on their ability to win, which is true. When he floundered that badly, yes, I am very sure that it caused them problems because they relied upon him to carry their offense. They were a team that relied a lot on precision of execution, and if you were able to disrupt their offense with length and athleticism, or by swarming Malone, then they had issues.

It's pretty clear that Utah had a great deal of offensive success with him, Stockton and Hornacek in the RS, that' is an irrefutable point, but you can see pretty clearly that when he struggled, it was a big problem for them. And he struggled frequently in the postseason.

Think about what you're saying: The Jazz relied on Malone, when Malone couldn't carry them, the team struggled. This is supposed to be bad??

Of course, Malone couldn't carry them to the degree that Dirk or Barkley could (we speculate) because we believe those two players to be a notch above on offense. This doesn't mean they are worlds better, just that there is a clear difference.

Similarly, I completely reject the notion that you can determine someone "struggled" by looking at their TS%. If you are arguing that the offense swayed with Malone and that he had a huge burden that he sometimes couldn't fulfill, then isn't it incredibly supportive of Malone's offense that the Jazz PS ORtgs were so good. Re-posting from an old project:

That said, Malone and KG had their shooting decline. But, as I've said, the playmaking and pressure on the defense increased. Here are Utah's PS ORtgs. In parens is the change from their RS number, then their opp DRtg in the PS and their ORtg relative to that. The final number is Malone's TS%:

1988: 108.7 (+2.1) 107.3 (+1.4) 53.7%
1989: 105.8 (-0.8) 107.7 (-1.9) 57.4%
1990: 108.0 (-2.3) 106.2 (+1.8) 50.5%
1991: 109.9 (+1.3) 105.1 (+4.8) 53.6%
1992: 113.7 (+1.5) 105.8 (+7.9) 61.8%
1993: 102.3 (-7.3) 104.9 (-2.6) 52.8%
1994: 107.1 (-1.5) 102.6 (+4.5) 53.1%
1995: 115.9 (+1.6) 107.4 (+8.5) 55.0%
1996: 109.7 (-3.6) 103.0 (+6.7) 49.8%
1997: 110.5 (-3.1) 104.0 (+6.5) 50.1%
1998: 102.8 (-9.9) 102.7 (+0.1) 53.4%

And, during Malone's best years, his teams offense look A-OK (92, 94-98), with the exception of 1998. So, what happened in 98? Isn't that the year Utah brutalized the West? The Jazz posted a 96.1 ORtg vs. Chicago, mostly from the infamous G3 meltdown...in which Malone was the only decent Utah player. (Other Jazz were 13-59 for 22% and 32 total points.) EDIT: That game alone cost them 3.5 ORtg points.

So, Malone's Jazz are posting 110 ORts against 103 defenses with him shooting 53% TS. Obviously, this isn't something that's hurting the team, and from perspective watching them, he was carrying a huge load and helping them achieve that on a team level. Sometimes, the TS% dips because of harder shot selection (dictated by defense). Sometimes, you just don't shoot quite as well. With Malone, I think it was a little of both, but he was drawing a LOT of defensive attention, and especially later in his career was a phenomenal passer.

Finally, as I've noted before, inconsistency in the playoffs when you aren't on a stacked team can actually be GOOD. Data suggest that it's better to go 2-20 3x in a series and 20-20 for 4x than go 12-20 every game...IF you're team isn't loaded. Utah wasn't. We see this pattern in Malone's deep playoff runs, and sometimes the bad games butcher his TS% (he literally has a 2-20 game).

There's this.....

Player POY Shares
1. Bill Russell 10.956
2. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar 10.221
3. Michael Jordan 9.578
4. Wilt Chamberlain 7.818
5. Magic Johnson 7.114
6. LeBron James 6.652
7. Tim Duncan 6.248
8. Larry Bird 6.147
9. Shaquille O'Neal 5.910
10. Julius Erving 5.046
11. Karl Malone 4.649
12. Bob Pettit 4.466
13. Oscar Robertson 4.413
14. Kobe Bryant 4.380
15. Hakeem Olajuwon 4.380
16. Jerry West 3.795
17. Kevin Garnett 3.571
18. Moses Malone 3.478
19. Dwyane Wade 2.601
20. David Robinson 2.431

Some other statistical footprint stuff (I like to glance over this kind of stuff, as it's basically the product of quality * time * durability):
Players with 30,000+ pts
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar (voted in at #2)
Michael Jordan (voted in at #1)
Kobe Bryant (voted in at #13)
Wilt Chamberlain (voted in at #4)
Karl Malone (yet to be voted in)

Players with 30,000+ pts and 10,000+ reb
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar (#2)
Wilt Chamberlain (#4)
Karl Malone (?)

Players with 30,000+ pts, 10,000+ reb, and 5,000+ ast
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar (#2)
Karl Malone (?)

Players with 30,000+ pts, 10,000+ reb, 5,000+ ast, and 2,000+ stl
Karl Malone (?)

[90sAllDecade]

Glad the logo got in.

For me this is Karl vs Dirk.

Unless someone can convince me Dirk offensive advantage is more impactful than Karl's combined offense and defense at PF, he's my likely pick.

Moses is so unorthodox and his defense hurt his team in Houston, but I'm not sure if his offensive rebounding made his teams from terrible to average in record and Ortg. He might be the opposite of a defensive center.

I also wonder if he's a better man defender than Karl, neither were defensive anchors but since he's a better shot blocker (he really improved his BLK% in Philly, perhaps it was a better defensive culture there?) I wonder if he's a better defensive player overall?

He's a wild card for me right now. If his defense is better and his offense wasn't enhanced by a PG of Stockton's caliber or a HOF coach's system I might vote him.

[trex_8063]

Some other statistical footprint stuff (I like to glance over this kind of stuff, as it's basically the product of quality * time * durability):
Players with 30,000+ pts
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar (voted in at #2)
Michael Jordan (voted in at #1)
Kobe Bryant (voted in at #13)
Wilt Chamberlain (voted in at #4)
Karl Malone (yet to be voted in)

Players with 30,000+ pts and 10,000+ reb
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar (#2)
Wilt Chamberlain (#4)
Karl Malone (?)

Players with 30,000+ pts, 10,000+ reb, and 5,000+ ast
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar (#2)
Karl Malone (?)

Players with 30,000+ pts, 10,000+ reb, 5,000+ ast, and 2,000+ stl
Karl Malone (?)

Also......

Players with 4,500+ pts in the playoffs
Michael Jordan (#1)
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar (#2)
Kobe Bryant (#13)
Shaquille O'Neal (#6)
Tim Duncan (#5)
Karl Malone (?)
*Julius Erving (#14; *can include him if we include ABA stats, though still slightly behind Malone, despite faster avg pace)

Players with 4,500+ pts and 2,000+ reb in the playoffs
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar (#2)
Tim Duncan (#5)
Shaquille O'Neal (#6)
Karl Malone (?)

Players with 4,500+ pts, 2,000+ reb, and 600+ ast in the playoffs
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar (#2)
Tim Duncan (#5)
Karl Malone (?)

Players with 4,500+ pts, 2,000+ reb, 600+ ast, and 250+ stl in the playoffs
Karl Malone (?)

[ThaRegul8r]

From last thread:

Looking at Malone and Dirk, and looking at the relevant criteria, fatal9 had this to say about Malone:

Spoiler:

This would me [sic] my assessment of Malone's scoring, I don't think "scoring without Stockton" is as much of an issue as other things...

- Amazing at getting the ball in traffic and either finishing or drawing fouls due to his strength. He had some of the best hands ever, doesn't matter who is throwing him the ball or what system he is in, he will always find a way to score off other players unless he plays on a team with literally zero ball movement.
- His ability to go to the right spots on the floor is a SKILL. The problem is, that sort of scoring can't be relied upon against a good set defense trying to make a stop. It's a good way to tack on the points when the defense lets up or makes mistakes however.
- In an iso situation, pretty much the only shot prime Malone was shooting was a 12-15 foot fallaway over a defender. He could mix it up over the course of a game, give you a little jump hook sometimes, face you up and drive, but 9 times out of 10, if you give him the ball and get out of his way, it's going to be that fallaway. I hate that shot, well not the shot itself but how many times he shot it. That sort of somewhat one dimensional iso-scoring is the reason he couldn't come through as a scorer in the playoffs at the rate you'd expect from someone with his averages. It's why when his jumper is on, he'll look unstoppable, shoot like 15/26 in one game but be 9/24 and 6/19 in the next two while taking the exact same shots. His consistency as an iso-scorer is just not where you'd like it to be.
- Stockton was responsible for a large number of late 80s/early 90s Malone's points. When people exagerrate and say Stockton spoon fed Malone, this is the version they are referring to. Malone became less and less dependent on Stockton as the years rolled by.
- As the 90s went on, his game progressed to being more finesse based (he could still make midrange shots when he was young, but didn't shoot them as often as later on), he also became a better one on one scorer (but again...I hate that fallaway) and with added experience he of course read defenses better and became a really good passer as well (over the shoulder no look pass being his trademark, great and hitting cutters and outlet passing).
- His conditioning was epic, he was probably the best forward ever at beating his man down the floor for an easy fastbreak basket. This again, is something teams can cut down when they adjust for it in the playoffs.
- PnR beast, in his younger days he attacked more off the PnR, in the MVP years he popped for the jumper.
- In general he got more easy baskets than any 25+ ppg guy I've consistently seen. Combination of playing with the best PG at delivering the ball, the offensive system Utah ran which creates lots of easy baskets off cuts and backscreens and to Malone's credit, him having a scorer's nose for where to be on the floor. Those easy baskets aren't quite as readily avaliable in the playoffs with better defensive teams so that contributes to decline in his playoff scoring as well.

This is why I don't see Malone's drop off in the playoffs as "choking", but as a drop off that can be naturally expected from him given his skills as a scorer. He was better at scoring on paper than a guy like Duncan...but he was better at things that are more likely to be taken away in the playoffs. That is why he's overrated as a scorer.

I posted this about Durant:

“One thing I criticize about Kevin Durant’s game, he still hasn’t learned to post up the little guys that guard him,” Charles Barkley said during the Sprint Halftime Report of Game 6 of the Western Conference Finals between the Oklahoma City Thunder and San Antonio Spurs. “My criticism of Durant has always been the same,” Barkley said on the postgame show. “He lets little guys guard him.”

Which was also true of Dirk at one point, that players smaller than him were able to guard him, which hindered his ability to effectively employ what he brings to the table to help his team win, but he rectified the point, which helped his team win.

Spoiler:

Five years later, Dirk's got more smarts

Originally Published: May 31, 2011
By Marc Stein | ESPN.com

Who knew?

Who knew that the night of Nov. 27 in Dallas would tell us so much about how this NBA season would be decided?

By now you're surely well aware of the players-only meeting in the visitors' locker room at American Airlines Center on that landmark date. Nearly 45 minutes of air-clearing -- after the Heat fell to 9-8 with an 11-point loss to the Mavs that felt more lopsided than that -- served as the springboard for Miami's turnaround.

Yet it turns out that there were some prophetic words from Heat coach Erik Spoelstra, just outside the clubhouse door, about an hour before that season-turning loss.

Asked to assess the big difference between the 2011 Dirk and the Nowitzki whom the Heat smothered in the Finals five years earlier, Spoelstra welcomed a question about something other than coaching in the face of mounting early pressure and lasered in on one of the biggest weapons Dallas used to conquer the West.

Nowitzki's smarts.

"More than anything, he's seen every coverage," Spoelstra said that night. "Some of the things we were successful with in the Finals, [Nowitzki] carves that up now.

"He's adjusted to all the defenses. It's almost like his mind is a computer now."

There you go. That's the big evolution in Nowitzki's game, if you're desperate to find one, since 2006.

"Experience," Nowitzki says simply.

The Heat's Udonis Haslem had success against him in 2006 -- as did Golden State's Stephen Jackson did in 2007 -- because slightly smaller defenders with a penchant for physicality used to be the toughest for Nowitzki to counter. The rugged Haslem was obsessed with "getting up into Dirk's airspace," as Spoelstra described it, which often led to hurried, harried shots from Nowitzki, who didn't yet have the requisite trickery and precision to shake him.

"He's gotten stronger," Thunder coach Scotty Brooks said in the last round after Nowitzki's 48-point detonation in Game 1 of the Western Conference finals. "Earlier in his career you could put a small on him and just really push around him and make him catch where he didn't want the ball. Now you can't do that."

Now?

Nowitzki doesn't rush. He patiently dissects defenses no matter what the coverage is. He either works himself to where he wants to go to shoot over people, spins hard to the bucket when defenders hug him too close as he backs in or punishes double-teams with a passing touch that improves more than anything else in his game from season to season. If opposing coaches hit him with constant switching, or try to trap him with a second defender when he spins, or even load up on his left hand to try take away his strong side, Nowitzki usually has a counter in his head.

Soon-to-be Houston Rockets coach Kevin McHale, working throughout the playoffs for TNT, describes it as the difference between a veteran sage who almost always takes shots he wants to take and the younger version of Nowitzki that often relied on pure talent to make tough shots. Or as Peja Stojakovic -- who became a Mavericks teammate after years of playoff battles against Nowitzki with Sacramento -- is prone to say: "Dirk is a like surgeon now."

A former teammate of some renown sees it the same way.

Steve Nash knows the feeling, because the game has helpfully slowed down for him, too. It's one of the rare upsides to getting older.

Getting wiser.

"Dirk might be marginally stronger than he used to be, but what I see is his total command of the situation," Nash said by phone from an undisclosed vacation location, where he's been sneaking looks at a TV late at night to see two of his best friends -- Nowitzki and Jason Kidd -- chase the ring that has eluded all three of them.

"He's totally in command," Nash said. "He's a machine. He gets the ball in his spots, takes him time and makes the defense pick their poison. That's what really separates him.

"He was always capable of doing these things. He was so good at that at 25, but sometimes you did think, 'What's he gonna be like in his 30s?' He's just more efficient, more patient. He's one of the best closers in the game -- and I think he's been doing it for a long time -- but I don't think he gets as much credit for that as he should."

Said Memphis Grizzlies swingman Shane Battier, who's been matched against Nowitzki frequently over the years: "He's always been an elite shooter. I played against him in a tournament in Paris [when both were teenagers] and it was the same thing … hitting 3s, step-back J's. Same game. Tough to guard.

"But now he's so much more willing to take the punishment when the game's on the line. I think that's really the only [noticeable] difference. When I was in Houston, we had all the [advanced] numbers on Dirk. Usually there's a weakness in a guy's game to tell you which way to shade him to make him ineffective. With Dirk, there's no good answer. Plus he's on a roll right now, so that's why I would not count the Mavericks out in this series."

Link

So that's a plus for Dirk. I looked at ElGee's thread about superstars against good and bad defenses in the regular and postseason again, and the data shows that Dirk doesn't care what defense he faces, while Malone falls off.

These criteria:

3. The possession of the rational self-interest to put ego aside in order to do #1 and #2, disregarding the opinions of irrelevant others who are not on the team and thus have no effect on the team’s success.

4. The ability to block out distractions and anything irrelevant to the maximization of the team’s chances of victory.

A player focusing on anything other than helping his team will receive a lower evaluation. A player’s job is to help bring his team wins. Nothing else matters or is relevant. Basketball players are grown men who make choices. They have the right to make whatever choice they want, but with action comes consequence. That choice they make will be honored and they will be evaluated on the basis of that choice, whether it’s beneficial or detrimental to the team’s chances of winning.

don't seem to be applicable here, as neither of them really had a problem with that.

5. The ability to rise to the occasion during big games and crucial moments in order to bring about the ultimate objective of winning, and the mental fortitude to do so.

Dirk has the edge on this criterion. As I said earlier:

This criterion is relevant in that I want to know if a player is able to effectively employ whatever it is he brings to the table in important moments in his team's quest for a title. Can he still do whatever it is that he does in big games? Players who can, that is a positive in my evaluation, causing them to move up in my rankings. If, for whatever reason, they cannot, that devalues them in my eyes. Whatever it is they bring to the table won't be of much use if they can't do it—whatever "it" is—when his team needs it most. This is what I'm getting at if when I want to know how a given player performs in the postseason. How well did he employ what he brings to the table in the postseason?

To that effect, being able to employ whatever it is that he brings in varying situations and against varying opponents is relevant. He needs to be able to do what he does against whatever opponent his team may face. Every player may have particular bad matchups, but a player who has less of these is more valuable to his team. I'm going to call it "matchup independence." The degree to which the ability of a player to employ whatever he bring to the table to help his team win isn't diminished by particular matchups.

Thus far, I'm leaning Dirk over Malone. I want to know how effectively they can utilize what they bring to the table to help their team win, and Dirk and Malone were both scorers, and the fact that Dirk was "fantastic," able to continue scoring against whatever defense he faced while Malone's "impressive scoring efficiency disappears" puts him over on my list based on my criteria. Fatal said Malone's drop off could "be naturally expected from him given his skills as a scorer," and he never rectified this, while Dirk did what he needed to do in order that his ability to employ what he brought to the table to help his team win wouldn't be hindered.

2. The ability to both identify what the team needs at any given moment in order to realize the ultimate object of winning and provide it.

I care about improvement when it enables the player to better be able to help his team win when not improving hinders his ability to help his team win. Dirk saw what he needed to do to help his team win and did it. That improvement made him more effective as noted by his peers above. The things that worked against him before were rendered ineffective. It made him better able to help his team win, which he did.

As far as Robinson and Moses, the fact that Robinson was a great defender and Moses wasn't is a plus in his favor. He was also able to conplement Duncan when he arrived without any ego over not being "The Man" anymore, which is also a plus. If that's what's needed of him, he showed he has no problem deferring. I just have to decide how much his inability to effectively utilize what he brought to the table to help his team win in the postseason during his prime should hurt him against his competition.

[D Nice]

I just have to decide how much his inability to effectively utilize what he brought to the table to help his team win in the postseason during his prime should hurt him against his competition.

Considering Dirk still hasn't been voted in, it's a pretty HUGE deal actually (IMO).

[ThaRegul8r]

I just have to decide how much his inability to effectively utilize what he brought to the table to help his team win in the postseason during his prime should hurt him against his competition.

Considering Dirk still hasn't been voted in, it's a pretty HUGE deal actually (IMO).

No, in that we both agree. As I posted, as I was looking at the criteria of what I value and considering how the current candidates meet them, I have Dirk as my leading choice among those currently eligible, and thus above Robinson.

[Texas Chuck]

I just have to decide how much his inability to effectively utilize what he brought to the table to help his team win in the postseason during his prime should hurt him against his competition.

Considering Dirk still hasn't been voted in, it's a pretty HUGE deal actually (IMO).

I think its fair to look at the Mavs' postseason results in the Dirk era and question them a little bit. A title, another Finals trip, and a WCF appearance is good but hardly overwhelming team success. The question then becomes did Dirk personally do all that he could in the series in which the Mavs were eliminated and to maybe look at the teams the Mavs lost to.

Mavs' series in which they were eliminated:

01 Spurs -- no shame in losing to the better team and in Dirk's 2nd ever PS series puts up a respectable 23/9 on 56%TS. Finley, Nash, and Juwan all have awful series.

02 Kings -- no shame in losing to top seeded Kings. Dirk 26/12, but struggled with efficiency 51%TS. Finley and Nash have pretty good series offensively. Dirk could have done a little better here.

03 Spurs -- no shame again especially as Dirk gets hurt 25/11 56%TS in 3 games he did play. Hard to tell how that series plays out if he doesnt get hurt

04 Kings-- this was a 4/5 matchup with Kings having HCA. Dirk puts up 27/12 on 56%TS. Literally every other player on the Mavs is awful. Bibby destroys Nash which really hurts.

05 Suns -- no shame as Suns are top seed and Nash is motivated and destroys the Mavs. Dirk 27/12 54%TS Howard and JET pretty good. Finley and Stack pretty terrible.

06 Heat -- This one stings a lot. Up 2-0 with big lead in game 3. Dirk misses crucial FT. Dirk 23/11 53%TS JET is good, Damp does good job on Shaq(with help), JHo terrible. Wade goes bananas.

07 GSW -- Ouch! 67 wins and losing to an 8 seed. Dirk 20/11 51%TS and 2/6 games are absolutely dreadful for Dirk. One of his worst series of all-time(05 Rockets 1st round and 14 Spurs 1st round are worse imo)

08 -- Hornets(now Pelicans) No shame for Mavs in losing to #2 seed. Dirk 27/12 59%TS Not much more he could do here

09 --Nuggets again for Mavs losing as 6 seed to #2 seed. No shame. Dirk 35/12/4 66%TS Nothing more Dirk could do here either

10 -- Mavs upset by 7 seeded Spurs(these teams always close as seen this year) Dirk 27/8 64%TS Rebounding is way down for him, but hard to fault him for this. Outside of Butler gets little help

11-- Champion

12-- Thunder, no shame for team losing to #2 seed. Dirk 27/6 56%TS Again rebounding is way down for Dirk, but he did his part. Just too much talent to overcome

13-- failed to make PS

14-- Spurs. No shame for team as they were the only ones to even put up a fight against the champs. Dirk has a terrible series. 19/8 48%TS

So you can look at the data and decide for yourselves how to judge Dirk in regards to Mavs playoff success and lack thereof.

[Doctor MJ]

Vote: Dirk Nowitzki

I like Dirk here because he's got the longevity of Malone with proven playoff success. In fact, he was rarely a letdown in the postseason barring the catastrophic 2007 first round exit after a 69 win season, but that was a fluke and ran into a team that both got hot at the right time and knew how to play them because of having their old coach.

And he's still going.

In what Way is Dirk's longevity on par with Karl Malone's? That's reaching imo.

This is a good thing to analyze. Let's forget about who has better longevity, and just look at some things that would help us look at how big of an edge Malone has.

First thing to come to mind to me is All-NBA selections since they both play forward. Total:

Malone 14
Dirk 12

What about number of seasons with a PER north of 20?

Malone 16
Dirk 13

So I look at that, and I'm fine giving Malone some longevity edge, but how much? How often would anyone think to choose between two guys based on his edge in their respective 13th/14th best years?

Then there's the peak/prime levels. I posted All-NBA before so it's only fair to look at 1st teams:

Malone 11
Dirk 4

That right there makes it pretty understandable picking Malone without looking at longevity really.

But then there's also the playoffs. That same PER comparison I did before but in the playoffs:

Malone 10
Dirk 12

And of course there's the Win Shares stuff I was looking at before relating to West. Years north of 0.18?

Malone 4
Dirk 8

Oh and if you disliked me cherry picking 0.18, and wanted a rounder number like 0.2, well:

Malone 2
Dirk 6

All of this has me thinking: If longevity is truly the deciding factor at this point for Malone, how much further would Dirk have to go to win the battle?

ftr, I'm really debating between Malone, Dirk, as well as Robinson right now. The tough thing for me is that I've felt the Malone > Robinson arguments have been very compelling, but Robinson > Dirk and Dirk > Malone also make sense. I'm a bit in one of those circular ranking things.

[trex_8063]

Dirk vs. Karl by per 100 and advanced stats; rs only, comparing equal number of seasons:

Dirk (career whole--16 seasons)
Per 100 Possessions
32.8 pts, 11.8 reb, 3.8 ast, 1.3 stl, 1.3 blk, 2.7 tov on .582 TS%
PER 23.5, .208 WS/48 in 35.9 mpg, 117 ORtg, 104 DRtg

Karl ('88-'03--16 seasons)
Per 100 Possessions
35.8 pts, 14.0 reb, 5.0 ast, 2.0 stl, 1.1 blk, 4.2 tov on .583 TS%
PER 24.9, .221 WS/48 in 37.9 mpg, 114 ORtg, 101 DRtg

Also note that due to his extreme durability, Malone played 1271 rs games in this stretch, compared to Dirk's 1188 total career games. So Malone played nearly one extra season worth of games relative to Dirk in this stretch (and overall his rs numbers are superior anyway).
Then further consider that while that is Dirk's entire career, Karl had THREE other seasons (one at borderline All-Star level, the other two at "valuable role player" level).

Alternately, could look at Karl's first 16 seasons (to compare to Dirk's "first" 16):

Karl ('86-'01)
Per 100 Possessions
35.2 pts, 14.2 reb, 4.7 ast, 1.9 stl, 1.1 blk, 4.2 tov on .582 TS%
PER 24.4, .212 WS/48 in 37.3 mpg, 113 ORtg, 101 DRtg

Again, Malone plays nearly one extra season worth of games in this stretch, and statistically looks marginally superior besides. And with using these 16 seasons, the THREE additional seasons he has on Dirk include one legit All-Star caliber year, another at least borderline AS year, and one solid role player year.


For a tighter look at just semi-extended prime....

Dirk ('01-'14---14 seasons)
Per 100 Possessions
33.7 pts, 12.0 reb, 3.9 ast, 1.3 stl, 1.4 blk, 2.7 tov on .585 TS%
PER 24.2, .218 WS/48 in 36.6 mpg, 118 ORtg, 104 DRtg

Karl ('88-'01---14 seasons)
Per 100 Possessions
36.5 pts, 14.3 reb, 4.8 ast, 1.9 stl, 1.1 blk, 4.2 tov on .589 TS%
PER 25.4, .228 WS/48 in 38.0 mpg, 115 ORtg, 101 DRtg

Karl played about 1/2 of a season more games during this stretch, too, and once again clearly has a small statistical edge.


In the playoffs.....

Dirk (career whole-->all game occurred in '01-'14 prime)
Per 100 Possessions
33.0 pts, 13.1 reb, 3.3 ast, 1.4 stl, 1.2 blk, 3.0 tov on .579 TS%
PER 24.2, .196 WS/48 in 41.1 mpg, 117 ORtg, 107 DRtg

Karl ('88-'01--14 seasons)
Per 100 Possessions
35.1 pts, 14.7 reb, 4.1 ast, 1.7 stl, 1.0 blk, 3.8 tov on .532 TS%
PER 22.7 PER, .157 WS/48 in 41.6 mpg, 108 ORtg, 103 DRtg


Overall, Dirk clearly the better playoff performer, Malone was clearly the better rs performer. And then Malone's got the three additional seasons on him (none of which could be classified irrelevant, imo), plus about one additional season worth of games played due to his durability--->this is very relevant, that the team can so reliably count on their star being there at tip-off time. As a for instance: Dirk missing 29 games in '13 basically cost the Mavs a playoff berth. The Jazz never had to worry about anything like that from Malone, not once in 18 seasons.

Dirk's the better offensive player: of an elite class on offense.
Malone is probably sub-elite on offense......but not by all that much. Still a very very formidable offensive weapon. His defense can pretty fairly be declared superior to Dirk's (consistently noted in rs DRtg, ps DRtg, accolades, and the eye-test).
Malone also the better rebounder, pretty substantially if measured by TRebs per 100. But even if one wants to disregard ORebs (where Malone has quite a large edge) as part of the offensive comparison, and focus only on DReb:

Karl in rs '88-'01
avg 10.9 DReb per 100
Peak season 11.9 DReb per 100
avg 23.9% DReb%
peak season 27.2% DReb%

Dirk in rs '01-'14
avg 10.4 DReb per 100
peak season 11.8 DReb per 100
avg 22.4% DReb%
peak season 25.1% DReb%

In the playoffs.....
Karl in ps '88-'01
avg 11.0 DReb per 100
peak season 12.7 DReb per 100
avg 24.0% DReb%
peak season 35.0% DReb%

Dirk in ps '01-'14
avg 11.1 DReb per 100
peak season 12.9 DReb per 100
avg 24.6% DReb%
peak season 28.0% DReb%

Malone's got the significant edge across the board in the rs (the much larger sample size, fwiw), and just barely behind in the ps numbers.
Overall, I rate peak Dirk as the better player, but not by much of a margin. The gap offensively (which is not that large, imo, and the above numbers---collectively; i.e. not just singling out one or two---stand testament to that; fwiw, I'd also made an evaluation on prior thread which may suggest Malone faced elite level team defenses and good to elite level defensive PF's in the playoffs at a slightly higher rate of occurrence than Dirk) is partially made up for on defense and rebounding. For whole primes, I think one can make a decent statistical case in Malone's favor.
And then there's the THREE additional relevant seasons Malone has to his credit as well as ~1 season gained simply on durability.

Anyway.....for your consideration......

[DannyNoonan1221]

As far as Robinson and Moses, the fact that Robinson was a great defender and Moses wasn't is a plus in his favor. He was also able to conplement Duncan when he arrived without any ego over not being "The Man" anymore, which is also a plus. If that's what's needed of him, he showed he has no problem deferring. I just have to decide how much his inability to effectively utilize what he brought to the table to help his team win in the postseason during his prime should hurt him against his competition.

Yes, Robinson has a clear advantage on the defensive end. How big that gap is I still am not sure, but there is a gap in DRob's favor.

But a plus to DR for playing second fiddle to Duncan (I agree, is a plus) should also mean a plus MM; he went to an already successful, good team, became THE man on that team and didn't screw up chemistry or success but actually helped push them over the top.

Just as I argued for Oscar in regards to his move to Milwaukee being more a validation for what he had done in Cincinnati, this, in my mind, is validation for Moses and therefore a plus that he was able to step into that 76ers Team, be the man and not hold the team back in any way.

My vote again goes to Moses. But I will say that my vote can be swayed for DRob- it was close in the last thread. I will try and do some more research regarding Moses' defense in order to get a better grasp on Robinson's advantage at that end.

[Basketballefan]

Again, breaking it down by position

CENTERS
David Robinson to me is the best left in terms of peak. Moses has great longevity though and the third possibility is George Mikan who is the only player left that was the undisputed best player in basketball for a reasonably long stretch of time (5 years +). I rate Robinson higher at the moment because Moses's defense is solid on ball but he isn't a defensive anchor and defensive anchors like the Admiral (anchor, Admiral, oh never mind) tend to have an impact out of proportion to their numbers. I think you win more titles with DRob than with Moses despite Moses's longevity advantage.

FORWARDS
Karl Malone is the obvious choice in terms of numbers, durability, everything but postseason success; although I have seen Dirk, Pettit, Barkley, and even Rodman rated over him by various posters.

GUARDS
Wade or Frazier. Wade is the most explosive scorer and plays excellent defense, Frazier didn't score as much but was an even better defender and playmaker, and even more known for stepping up and dominating 2 NBA finals. This one is very close; I lean Frazier over West but willing to be convinced. I see Clyde as a step up over Nash and Stockton for his ability to take over games with both his scoring and defense, over Payton, Kidd, or Isiah for his scoring efficiency and superior all around game. Both Wade and Frazier do suffer a little from short or injury riddled primes.

Right now, I am leaning to Karl Malone from all the debate but willing to change.

In what Way is Frazier a more dominant finals performer than prime Wade?

For a start, Frazier dominated 2 finals, Wade only dominated 1. Also, in addition to dominating offensively, Frazier shut down Jerry West defensively; just a super dominant performance at both ends (by a player I hated at the time; bloody Knicks).

Wade was dominant in 2011 Finals despits the loss. 27 7 5 on 62% ts should be considered dominant. But since neither are a legitimate canidate for this spot i wont go into further detail.

[JordansBulls]

Vote: Moses Malone

We are talking about the only player on the list currently with 3+ MVP's that has not been voted in yet. Also won a title as the man, only one of a handful of players to have won league mvp and title or league mvp, finals mvp (when it existed) and title the same year. When Moses parted the Red Sea he was 1st in WS Per 48 minutes in the season and playoffs, 1st in Win Shares in the season and playoffs and 1st in PER in the season and playoffs and led one of the top 5 teams all time in the process.

Players who won league mvp and title the same year.

Spoiler:

Examples:

1957 Bob Cousy
1961 Bill Russell
1962 Bill Russell
1963 Bill Russell
1965 Bill Russell
1967 Wilt Chamberlain
1968 Connie Hawkins (ABA)
1970 Willis Reed
1971 Kareem
1974 Julius Erving (ABA)
1976 Julius Erving (ABA)
1980 Kareem
1983 Moses Malone
1984 Larry Bird
1986 Larry Bird
1987 Magic Johnson
1991 Michael Jordan
1992 Michael Jordan
1994 Hakeem Olajuwon
1996 Michael Jordan
1998 Michael Jordan
2000 Shaquille O'neal
2003 Tim Duncan
2012 Lebron James
2013 Lebron James

[ThaRegul8r]

As far as Robinson and Moses, the fact that Robinson was a great defender and Moses wasn't is a plus in his favor. He was also able to conplement Duncan when he arrived without any ego over not being "The Man" anymore, which is also a plus. If that's what's needed of him, he showed he has no problem deferring. I just have to decide how much his inability to effectively utilize what he brought to the table to help his team win in the postseason during his prime should hurt him against his competition.

Yes, Robinson has a clear advantage on the defensive end. How big that gap is I still am not sure, but there is a gap in DRob's favor.

Robinson was an elite defender and Moses was not. Furthermore, Robinson was one of the greatest defenders at his position ever. Attempting to minimize this wouldn't be convincing for me.

But a plus to DR for playing second fiddle to Duncan (I agree, is a plus) should also mean a plus MM; he went to an already successful, good team, became THE man on that team and didn't screw up chemistry or success but actually helped push them over the top.

Just as I argued for Oscar in regards to his move to Milwaukee being more a validation for what he had done in Cincinnati, this, in my mind, is validation for Moses and therefore a plus that he was able to step into that 76ers Team, be the man and not hold the team back in any way.

Now THIS is your advantage and the area you should emphasize, speaking solely for myself. In my criteria, I don't care what a player brings to the table in order to help his team win, I just want him to use it to help his team win. While Moses wasn't the defender Robinson was, he was able to use what he had going for him to help his team win during his prime, unlike Robinson, and is a plus for him. Also a plus, as you said, he didn't screw up team chemistry. As a matter of fact, he continually showed respect to Erving, who'd already been there and had led the 76ers to multiple Finals and said that it was still Doc's show, he was just to help make it a better show. He didn't step on Erving's toes and continually said it was Erving's team that season. That's another plus for him, helping the team get over the hump while not making the guy already there who'd led the team to three Finals feel marginalized.

Speaking solely for myself, that's what you should be emphasizing. My not liking that Moses wasn't the defender others at his position is irrelevant if one can show that despite this Moses was better able to utilize his respective strengths more effectively to help his team win than Robinson. That's the whole point of me crystalizing explicitly-defined criteria. So long as (in this case) Moses better meets them than Robinson, then he gets ranked higher. Period. That way "feelings" are completely removed from the equation. In my criteria I state that no one way of helping one's team win is valued more highly than another. I just care that they use it--whatever "it" is--to help their team win, which is the first and foremost criterion on my list.

[RoyalInstinct]

I don't think I can vote since I'm new here but this list intrigues me.

Making an argument for D-Wade -

His most impressive performances include -

1. Averaging 30.2/5.0/7.5/2.2/1.3 on 57.4 TS% over an entire season. Nobody else has ever averaged 30/5/7/2/1 on 57 TS%. Only three players have ever been close - Michael Jordan, Oscar Robertson, and LeBron James.

2. Averaging 33.2/5.6/6.8/1.6/1.6 on 63.2 eFG% in a playoff series against the Boston Celtics (50-32/5th defensive rating). Again, he is the only person to ever average this. Only Michael Jordan and Tracy McGrady have ever been close.

3. Averaging 24.3/5.0/6.0/1.8/1.0 on 49.2 FG%/50.6 eFG%/56.8 TS% over his career (as of this season). Only LeBron James has averaged better so far.

4. Leading the Heat to success each year as the best player until LeBron James arrived.

03-04 - 42-40 - Advanced past Hornets in the first round and averaged 21.0/4.0/5.7 on 56.7 TS% versus the Pacers.

04-05 - 59-23 - Advanced past Nets, Wizards, and played Pistons to a 7 game series despite injuries to their best players. Wade missed Game 6 but still averaged 25.8/4.5/4.3/1.7/1.0 on 51.9 TS% against them. Overall, he was the best player that postseason, averaging 27.4/5.7/6.6/1.6/1/1 on 56.1 TS% while Shaq averaged 19.4/7.8/1.9/0.4/1.5 on 55.8 FG%.

05-06 - 52-30 - Won the championship averaging 34.7/7.8/3.8/2.7/1.0 on 57 TS% in the Finals.

06-07 - 44-38 - Swept by the Bulls even though Wade averaged 23.5/4.8/6.3 against the trio of Luol Deng, Ben Gordon, and Ben Wallace. He could have been more efficient (48.7 TS%) and played better.

07-08 - 15-67 - Their worst record as a franchise, but Wade was injured for more than 30 games, and still managed to average 24.6/4.2/6.9 on 54.9 TS%. When he played, his team was 10-41. Without him, they were 5-26 in the regular season.

08-09 - 43-39 - Took the Hawks to 7 game series while averaging 29.1/5.0/5.3 on 56.5 TS%. Emphasizing his lack of help, his next best players were Michael Beasley (12.1/7.3 on 44.5 TS%) and a past-prime Jermaine O' Neal (13.3/4.5).

09-10 - 47-35 - With essentially the same roster, Wade put up on the greatest losing individual performances in history. Averaging 65 TS% and a 40% assist ratio with a roster where nobody (except Joel Anthony) averaged above a 46.2 FG%, Wade's lowest TS% in the entire series was 54.6% while his highest was when he scored 46 points on a 77.1 eFG%.

I personally think Wade has a great case for #16. That's just me though.

[ThaRegul8r]

This was written after last year's season:

Spoiler:

Longreads: Dirk vs. the Best in the Playoffs

By Andrew Tobolowsky @andytobo on Jun 11 2013, 1:09p

Dirk Nowitzki against the greatest PFs of his era, head to head

As we watch the Big Fundamental do what basically no one in NBA history has ever done, take a team to the NBA finals about 14 years after he did it the first time, cementing his place as the best PF of all time, I thought it'd be a good time to take a look at where Dirk stacks up, by taking a look at how he performed head to head against the greatest PFs of his era.

So here it is: Dirk against his best contemporaries, on the biggest stage.

Tim Duncan #1, May 2001:

Dirk Nowitzki's first playoff series ever came in May of 2001 against the Utah Jazz. I remember it pretty clearly, since it was the last time I ever felt good watching a playoff game-the win against the Jazz was so much more than I expected, even if Dirk's line of 23.8 and 7.6 was not what we would come to expect.

While in the next series, against the Spurs, he struggled considerably in the first three games, they would prove to be vital ones. The Mavericks would lose in five to Those San Antonio Spurs in the first ever Tim-Dirk playoff clash but in game 4, a light went on that has never gone off. Dirk threw up 30 and 9 in game 4, shooting 61% from the field, leading the Mavericks to a four point win. Although the Spurs would demolish the Mavs in the fifth game eliminator it certainly wasn't Dirk's fault.

Dirk's introduction to being the lone star in the Dallas sky, Tim's introduction to a decade of Dirk, and Dirk's Hello There to the playoff stage was that 105-87 loss to the Spurs. He scored 42 points, grabbed 18 rebounds, dished 2 assists, got 1 block and somehow swiped six steals.

All told, Tim, who'd already won a championship in 1999 and would win his second that year, bested the neophyte Dirk to the tune of 27-17.4 with 2 blocks, 3.6 assists and a steal to Dirk's 23-8.6 with 1 block, 1.8 steals and 1.2 assists, but it wasn't a fair fight yet. Those days, however, weren't very far in the future.

Kevin Garnett, April 2002

In my opinion, the greatest players of Dirk's era are Duncan, Kobe, Dirk, Garnett in that order. A lot of people put Garnett ahead of Dirk, because he was a two way player but that's not really fair. Garnett in his prime was a destructive defender and a good scorer. But that doesn't really incapsulate how MUCH better a scorer Dirk was, and is. Kevin's been in the league four more seasons than Dirk is about 200 ahead of him in points. No one should undersell that mismatch.

Although back in the days of best of five first round series and although it was a Dallas sweep, the Mavericks-Minnesota playoffs in April 2002 were an instant classic BECAUSE of the head to head matchup. Two of the top five PFs of all time, in their primes, and by a great deal the centerpiece of their two teams. And it didn't disappoint. Kevin Garnett averaged an insane 24 points, 18.7 boards, 5 assists and 2 blocks a game.

But Dirk averaged 33.3 points, 15.7 rebounds, 3 steals and 1.3 blocks game, shooting 53% from the floor and 73% from three and no game in this series was particularly close. That nearly 16 rebounds, by the way, is an understated but essential part of the game of the Dirk Nowitzki Mavs fans have known and loved-he thrived on going against the best. He thrived on the big stage. People never got that, because he didn't talk afterwards. But he saw Kevin Garnett gobbling up boards and he wasn't going to let him do all the damage, that way.

Tim Duncan #2, May 2003

In 2002-2003, the Mavericks got their shot at the team that taught them what playoff basketball is all about, the San Antonio Spurs. And then, of course, they didn't. After torching the Timberwolves, with 30 points, 9 rebounds, including a 46-10 game, a 42-10 game and a 31-11 game to cap it off, then fighting his way through the Kings, averaging 21 points and 14 rebounds, including 30-19 in the finisher, you'll remember that Dirk suffered a knee injury in game 3, and missed the next 3 games. And he may have made it back on the court for Game 7, he may not have, and he may have been effective, and he may not have, but Steve Kerr made sure he didn't get a chance. Somehow.

The great Duncan-Dirk matchups would have to wait-but in the three games he DID play, even with the measly 15-9 he managed in the game he got injured, he threw up 25-11, including 38-15 to get the series started with a win.

Tim Duncan #2, Pau Gasol #1, April and May 2006

It would be a couple years before Dirk and any of the Great PFs would meet again, thanks to the emergence of the Suns and the last gasp of the Kings. But in 2005-2006, he would see two of them, Duncan and Gasol, and this time there was nothing in his way. Dirk made it to the 2005-2006 playoffs healthy, experienced, and playing some of the best basketball of his life. And it showed.

Just as with Garnett's Wolves, Gasol's Grizzlies never had a chance. Although Pau managed a respectable enough 20.3-6.8-1.3, it wasn't enough to come close to Dirk and the Mavericks. Dirk went for 31-8 over four games, and only one game was within single digits.

The next series would be the greatest playoff series I've ever watched, a series so good it made the NBA change its seeding rules so something that good wouldn't be wasted in the conference semifinals. Over seven games, and that famous seventh game over time, Tim Duncan averaged an immense 32-11.7 with 2.6 blocks and 3.7 steals. Dirk could not quite match him, with 27.1-13.3 2.7 assists and 1.4 steals. Even in that Game 7, Timmy was just a little bit better than Dirk, throwing up 41-15 with 6 assists, 3 blocks and a steal to Dirk's 37-15 3 assists, a block and a steal.

But it was Dirk who made the most important shot, a rim-rattling dunk with Manu's hand on his wrist and the following free throw to tie the game with 21 seconds to go-and according to the Game Log, it was Dirk who blocked Tim Duncan's put-back attempt with zeroes on the clock to send it to overtime.

Where, incidentally, Dirk and Duncan each had two points, Jason Terry had four, DeSagana Diop had three and Jerry Stackhouse had four. That's how basketball go, I guess.

Tim Duncan #3, April 2009

In my opinion, it was this series which saved the Mavericks. On the heels of first round exits against the Warriors and the Hornets, and staring at a third against the powerhouse Spurs, Cuban and Donnie had to be thinking about breaking it up and trying again. Instead, the Mavs kept their core intact, and within two years had made the moves-Shawn Marion, Tyson Chandler, and yes, Caron Butler and Brendan Haywood-that brought the trophy to Dallas.

But it was a weird matchup. Duncan, by this time suffering the foot injuries that most observers thought would end his career, wasn't his usual self and neither was Dirk. However, for the record books, Dirk did average 19.2 and 8.6 while Duncan averaged 19.8 and 8.0. And if anyone wants to explain to me how, in two straight playoff matchups Duncan outscored Dirk and Dirk outrebounded Duncan, be my guest.

The Mavs would go on to lose in five to the Denver Nuggets still helmed by Carmelo Anthony, but it would be one of Dirk's most brilliant series. The media, predictably, was all over Dirk in that series for saying the Nuggets guarded him well, the kind of thing mean S.O.B.s who win championships would never say, apparently. They didn't want to notice, one suspects, that Dirk's 28-10 game 1, on 55% shooting, was his worst scoring output of the series, in which he averaged 34.4 points, 11.6 rebounds, 4.0 assists, a block and a steal. He shot 53% from the floor and 92% from the line.

And, of course, that series could have been a lot closer than it was, as it almost certainly should have been 2-2 after four rather than 3-1, given the no-call on Antoine Wright wrapping up Carmelo before he could shoot a three. But, then, any series in which Dirk has to go 44-13 to win by two probably wasn't fated to go the Mavericks way.

Tim Duncan #4, April 2009

Yowza. All told, the Mavericks faced the Spurs in the playoffs 5 times and went 2-3. Not bad for a team that has one ring against the other guy's four, going for five. If you add to that the fact that of the last four, one involved a Dirk knee injury, one was a 5 game Mavericks victory, and the other two included a combined 13 games, you can get some idea of just how good those 00s Mavericks teams really were. It's this kind of thing that keeps 2006 haunting me-Dirk deserved that second ring, and to be known as one of the truly great players of the 00s. He earned his one more than most players have ever earned anything, but from a historical perspective if you could say this guy went to three conference Finals and won two rings, it's a resume up there with some of the absolute best.

However, this was the series which made it so surprising that the Spurs are right back there as one of the most dominant teams in the game. Yes, the Spurs won. But they went on to get swept by the Suns in the next round, and meanwhile Duncan managed an unimpressive (by his high standards) 18.2-9.5 to Dirk's 26.7-8.2. This included one of the great playoff performances I've ever seen, foreshadowing an even more impressive effort against the Thunder in 2011, when Dirk went 12-14, 12-12 from the stripe for 36 points and the win.

At that point, as good as Dirk still was, it certainly looked like the Mavs were on their way out, and the Spurs not too far behind them. And then...

Pau Gasol #2, May 2011

One of the things NBA commenters are worst at is context. It's what my buddy J-Tjarks tells me is the "Fundamental Attribution Error", the idea that all things are possible through the will so what's lacking is personal, not contextual.

In this case, by virtue of a steal of a trade which sent Pau Gasol to a star-studded Lakers team and to three straight Finals appearances, Mavs fans everywhere had to listen to announcers, notably Steve Kerr, wax on and on about how Pau Gasol was the best PF in the league.

But this was the series-the 2011 Mavs-Lakers series that forever disabused everyone of that impression.

And it's also the series that seemed to break Pau, on some fundamental level.

Pau's managed an even-more-unimpressive-than-it-sounds 12.5-9.3 to Dirk's 25-9 which, incidentally, included sitting out nearly all the second half of the game four blowout. It's not that Pau was disengaged, his 9 boards were impressive on a team with Bynum and he even managed 4 assists a game. It's that Dirk, in 2011, was a stone cold, killing machine. And Pau Gasol got in his way.

I have never in my life seen a player shoot 50% over the course of the season from the places Dirk shot from in 2011. He was about .02 (.393 from three) and .03 (.892 from the line) from the 40-50-90 club. In that Lakers series it was 57-73-94. And the hangover, a game 1 12-14, 24-24 from the line, 48 point effort against the Thunder was the most efficient scoring game I imagine I'll ever see.

Conclusions

There you have it, folks. Dirk Nowitzki has gone head to head, in the playoffs, against Kevin Garnett once, Pau Gasol twice, and Tim Duncan five times. He's 3-0 against Garnett and Gasol and was statistically superior in every matchup, sometimes considerably. He's 2-3 against Duncan, but that includes Dirk's first playoffs and his only major postseason injury. Duncan, in his prime, certainly had his day against Dirk, but in recent matchups there's been a draw and a statistically superior showing. In fact, this investigation reveals the startling fact that Dirk has NEVER lost a playoff game to Garnett or Gasol. He loves to play the best, and he thrives when he does.

It's worth noting, of course, that of these four guys, Dirk may be the worst defender and that by "statistics" I mean only comparably old-fashioned ones like points, boards, blocks, assists. This is especially notable with Duncan, the only guy on this list capable of matching Dirk point for point in the playoffs and of playing vastly superior defense.

I don't think there's an intelligent fan out there who doubts that Dirk's career was better than Pau's, despite Pau's additional ring. Obviously KG spent many good years in the Eastern Conference where he and Dirk never got the chance for another playoff showdown.

But (very) long story short, I think this shows pretty clearly that against the best of his era, Dirk always brought his A-game. And more often than not, he came out on top.

Link

[drza]

Alright, West is in. It seems like the roster for this spot consists of all big men: Robinson, Dirk, Karl and Moses have been the discussion so far. Looking at that list, it just seems only right that Charles Barkley should be the 5th under consideration, right? He's the other PF that joins Dirk and Karl in the modern top-5 PFs list; he came into the league on a team starring Moses (who he calls his daddy), and he was a peer that had multiple battles with Robinson. Plus, I'm not really convinced that Barkley wasn't better than at least some of these folks. So, I'm adding him to my list to discuss.

Box Score stats:

Moses Malone (1979 - 88): 31.5 pts (57.2% TS), 17.4 reb, 2 asts, 4.4 TO
Charles Barkley (1987 - 1996): 32.4 pts (62.2% TS), 15.5 reb, 5.5 asts, 4.3 TO
Karl Malone (1990 - 1999): 36.8 pts (59.3% TS), 14.5 reb, 5 ast, 4 TO
David Robinson (90 - 2000): 33.3 pts (58.8% TS), 15.9 reb, 4 ast, 3.9 TO
Dirk Nowitzki (2002 - 2011): 34.5 pts (58.4% TS), 12.3 reb, 4 ast, 2.8 TO

Playoffs, 10 year primes per 100 possessions
Moses Malone (1979 - 88): 28.9 pts (54.5%), 16.8 reb, 2 asts, 3.4 TO
Charles Barkley (1987 - 1996): 32 pts (58.2%), 16.3 reb, 5.3 asts, 3.3 TO
Karl Malone (1990 - 1999): 35 pts (52.9%), 15 reb, 4.4 asts, 3.7 TO
David Robinson (90 - 2000): 30 pts (54.6%), 16.1 reb, 3.8 ast, 3.7 TO
Dirk Nowitzki (2002 - 2011): 33.4 pts (58.5%), 13.5 reb, 3.5 ast, 3.0 TO

Some thoughts. Barkley's the new guy on this list, but his stats absolutely fit right in and might even shoot to the front of the class. Offensively, Chuck is the deal. He's right there in scoring volume, but his scoring efficiency is nuts in the regular season and only challenged by Dirk in the postseason. Not only that, but he also averages more assists than any of the other competitors which reflects how his ball-handling and passing skills allowed him to initiate his team's offense. Offensively, which is primarily what is measured by the box scores, Barkley is very likely the best player on this list across both the regular and postseason with Dirk as his only real competition.

Stylistics

Again, the style makes the fight. I feel that of the five, Moses has the most limited skill set. This isn't the worst sin, but unlike Shaq, Moses' limited skillset wasn't demonstrably more dominant than the others under consideration here. I start off this thread with Moses still at the bottom among those under consideration.

If I'm looking at offense, as mentioned above, I feel like this is a two-horse race between Barkley and Dirk. Similar scoring volumes, and while Barkley has the efficiency advantage in the regular season Dirk matches him their in the postseason. Barkley's game evolved over time. In his "Round Mound of Rebound" youth, Barkley was this unlikely athletic beast on the blocks. He looked fat, but he could get position and finish on anyone. He also could get out and run, sometimes as a one-man fast-break, handling the ball coast-to-coast for the finish. As he got older, Barkley was still strong in the post but he also developed a stronger face-up game with shooting range out to the 3-point line. He could run an offense, not just from the high-post, but really almost like a wing from the perimeter. Barkley's added range and initiation abilities seemingly play very well in two of the areas that generally lead to great non-boxscore impacts on offense. Put that with his video game box score stats, and Barkley is on the short list of GOAT offensive players.

Dirk's case over Barkley offensively would focus around him matching his volume and efficiency in the postseason, while being able to operate even more-so as a perimeter finisher and mid-post threat. Also...for some reason I don't remember a lot of pick-and-roll/pop from Barkley. This could be oversight on my part, and if so withdraw this section, but I know Dirk is absolutely deadly at the perimeter pick-and-roll/pop game since the defense can never afford to give him an inch from that range. This is a scoring approach that works even in the postseason, and this contributed to a lot of open shots for teammates like Jason Terry. It would seem like Barkley and KJ should have been good pick partners, so maybe this isn't something exclusive to Dirk. But I think his jumper makes him the best at it of this list.

On the other side of the ball, of course, on the other side of the ball, Robinson is clearly the man by a huge margin over any of the others under consideration. Moses, Dirk and Karl all fall on a continuum from about average to above average but not dominant on defense. And of course, defense is likely Barkley's biggest weakness here. His lack of height was already a natural barrier to his defensive upside, but his self-stated lack of interest in that side of the ball made it worse. Barkley had the athleticism to be a defensive pest, especially as a thief, but on the whole this is the part of his game where he gives back some of his offensive gains.

Non-box-score individual quantification (Barkley added to what was written previously)

We only have full databall data for (just about) the complete career of Dirk. We have +/- data from 1998 on for Robinson, Barkley and Karl. For the older players we have WOWY data and/or team transition data. Because of the different scales, we can only get so quantitative with the comparisons of this data. But a few notes:

*Moses' WOWY and junction numbers weren't very impressive. Mainly from memory from previous projects, but I recall Moses' non-boxscore estimated impacts to be far more pedestrian than the other players on this list and not very impressive for a super-duper star.

*Dirk measured out as elite in the +/- studies. In Doc MJ's 1998 - 2012 spreadsheet, he was essentially tied with Tim Duncan for the 4th/5th slots in both 3-year (+10.2) and 5-year (+9.1) peak behind Shaq/LeBron/KG. And Dirk's prime was very long. As I pointed out in the Dirk vs Kobe post, he was posting high +/- scores on pretty much a yearly basis from 2003 on.

*I'll post the Karl and Robinson +/- section from the comparison post I did on them, and add Barkley:

Malone
98: 9.0 (+8.8 ORAPM; 0.2 DRAPM)
99: 5.8 (+6.4 ORAPM; -.6 DRAPM)
00: 5.5 (+6.9 ORAPM; -1.4 DRAPM)

Robinson
98:7.4 (+1.2 ORAPM; +6.2 DRAPM)
99: 8.9 (+2.3 ORAPM; +6.6 DRAPM)
00: 8.3 (+2.7 ORAPM; +5.6 DRAPM)

Barkley
98 5.7 (+8.7 ORAPM; -3.0 DRAPM)
99: 4.5 (+7.8 ORAPM; -3.4 DRAPM)
00: 3.6 (+5.9 ORAPM; -2.3 DRAPM)

For those that don't know, this data came from Doc MJ's normalized PI RAPM spreadsheet from 1998 - 2012. I only did 1998 - 2000 for all three players, because we don't have +/- data in 2001 and only partial for 2002, and by 2003 all were either done or on their last legs. I found these numbers revealing for a few reasons. Malone's value in these years was almost all offense, while Robinson's value was primarily defense. Barkley's value was mega on offense, but hugely negative on defense.

*For those that believe 1998 to be in Karl's peak, it is interesting that his +9.0 normalized RAPM score from 1998 is almost exactly the same as Dirk's 5-year peak (+9.1) but noticeably lower than Dirk's 3-year (+10.2) and single-season (+11.5) peaks.

*Similarly, '98 Karl and '99 Robinson both had almost the exact same overall normalized RAPM score, though as mentioned Karl's was almost all offensive and Robinson's was primarily defensive.

*These seasons marked the end of the road for Barkley, when injuries had sapped him of much of his athleticism and kept him off the court for major swatches of games. That said, his offensive impact was still remarkable and as good or better per ORAPM as anything we ever saw from Shaq (best ORAPM +8.6), Kobe (+7.9), or Dirk (+7.8). In fact, Barkley's ORAPM in 1998 and 1999 was almost a carbon-copy to what we saw from Karl Malone in those same years. The difference came on defense, where late 90s Malone measured out to a net neutral on defense, while Barkley measured out as a huge defensive negative. As I said, some of that is likely due to injuries weakening him so I wouldn't project those numbers backwards for Barkley. That said, the expectation even in his healthy youth was that defense was a negative for him.

Pole positions entering this thread

I've still got Robinson and Dirk as my two to beat in this thread. Barkley flashes brilliance on offense, but doesn't separate himself from Dirk there while I suspect that his defense may have been enough worse for Dirk to edge the comp. I wrote last thread about my vote dilemma between Dirk and Robinson, and at the moment that's still where I am as I prepare for this vote.

[RoyalInstinct]

This was written after last year's season:

Spoiler:

Longreads: Dirk vs. the Best in the Playoffs

By Andrew Tobolowsky @andytobo on Jun 11 2013, 1:09p

Dirk Nowitzki against the greatest PFs of his era, head to head

As we watch the Big Fundamental do what basically no one in NBA history has ever done, take a team to the NBA finals about 14 years after he did it the first time, cementing his place as the best PF of all time, I thought it'd be a good time to take a look at where Dirk stacks up, by taking a look at how he performed head to head against the greatest PFs of his era.

So here it is: Dirk against his best contemporaries, on the biggest stage.

Tim Duncan #1, May 2001:

Dirk Nowitzki's first playoff series ever came in May of 2001 against the Utah Jazz. I remember it pretty clearly, since it was the last time I ever felt good watching a playoff game-the win against the Jazz was so much more than I expected, even if Dirk's line of 23.8 and 7.6 was not what we would come to expect.

While in the next series, against the Spurs, he struggled considerably in the first three games, they would prove to be vital ones. The Mavericks would lose in five to Those San Antonio Spurs in the first ever Tim-Dirk playoff clash but in game 4, a light went on that has never gone off. Dirk threw up 30 and 9 in game 4, shooting 61% from the field, leading the Mavericks to a four point win. Although the Spurs would demolish the Mavs in the fifth game eliminator it certainly wasn't Dirk's fault.

Dirk's introduction to being the lone star in the Dallas sky, Tim's introduction to a decade of Dirk, and Dirk's Hello There to the playoff stage was that 105-87 loss to the Spurs. He scored 42 points, grabbed 18 rebounds, dished 2 assists, got 1 block and somehow swiped six steals.

All told, Tim, who'd already won a championship in 1999 and would win his second that year, bested the neophyte Dirk to the tune of 27-17.4 with 2 blocks, 3.6 assists and a steal to Dirk's 23-8.6 with 1 block, 1.8 steals and 1.2 assists, but it wasn't a fair fight yet. Those days, however, weren't very far in the future.

Kevin Garnett, April 2002

In my opinion, the greatest players of Dirk's era are Duncan, Kobe, Dirk, Garnett in that order. A lot of people put Garnett ahead of Dirk, because he was a two way player but that's not really fair. Garnett in his prime was a destructive defender and a good scorer. But that doesn't really incapsulate how MUCH better a scorer Dirk was, and is. Kevin's been in the league four more seasons than Dirk is about 200 ahead of him in points. No one should undersell that mismatch.

Although back in the days of best of five first round series and although it was a Dallas sweep, the Mavericks-Minnesota playoffs in April 2002 were an instant classic BECAUSE of the head to head matchup. Two of the top five PFs of all time, in their primes, and by a great deal the centerpiece of their two teams. And it didn't disappoint. Kevin Garnett averaged an insane 24 points, 18.7 boards, 5 assists and 2 blocks a game.

But Dirk averaged 33.3 points, 15.7 rebounds, 3 steals and 1.3 blocks game, shooting 53% from the floor and 73% from three and no game in this series was particularly close. That nearly 16 rebounds, by the way, is an understated but essential part of the game of the Dirk Nowitzki Mavs fans have known and loved-he thrived on going against the best. He thrived on the big stage. People never got that, because he didn't talk afterwards. But he saw Kevin Garnett gobbling up boards and he wasn't going to let him do all the damage, that way.

Tim Duncan #2, May 2003

In 2002-2003, the Mavericks got their shot at the team that taught them what playoff basketball is all about, the San Antonio Spurs. And then, of course, they didn't. After torching the Timberwolves, with 30 points, 9 rebounds, including a 46-10 game, a 42-10 game and a 31-11 game to cap it off, then fighting his way through the Kings, averaging 21 points and 14 rebounds, including 30-19 in the finisher, you'll remember that Dirk suffered a knee injury in game 3, and missed the next 3 games. And he may have made it back on the court for Game 7, he may not have, and he may have been effective, and he may not have, but Steve Kerr made sure he didn't get a chance. Somehow.

The great Duncan-Dirk matchups would have to wait-but in the three games he DID play, even with the measly 15-9 he managed in the game he got injured, he threw up 25-11, including 38-15 to get the series started with a win.

Tim Duncan #2, Pau Gasol #1, April and May 2006

It would be a couple years before Dirk and any of the Great PFs would meet again, thanks to the emergence of the Suns and the last gasp of the Kings. But in 2005-2006, he would see two of them, Duncan and Gasol, and this time there was nothing in his way. Dirk made it to the 2005-2006 playoffs healthy, experienced, and playing some of the best basketball of his life. And it showed.

Just as with Garnett's Wolves, Gasol's Grizzlies never had a chance. Although Pau managed a respectable enough 20.3-6.8-1.3, it wasn't enough to come close to Dirk and the Mavericks. Dirk went for 31-8 over four games, and only one game was within single digits.

The next series would be the greatest playoff series I've ever watched, a series so good it made the NBA change its seeding rules so something that good wouldn't be wasted in the conference semifinals. Over seven games, and that famous seventh game over time, Tim Duncan averaged an immense 32-11.7 with 2.6 blocks and 3.7 steals. Dirk could not quite match him, with 27.1-13.3 2.7 assists and 1.4 steals. Even in that Game 7, Timmy was just a little bit better than Dirk, throwing up 41-15 with 6 assists, 3 blocks and a steal to Dirk's 37-15 3 assists, a block and a steal.

But it was Dirk who made the most important shot, a rim-rattling dunk with Manu's hand on his wrist and the following free throw to tie the game with 21 seconds to go-and according to the Game Log, it was Dirk who blocked Tim Duncan's put-back attempt with zeroes on the clock to send it to overtime.

Where, incidentally, Dirk and Duncan each had two points, Jason Terry had four, DeSagana Diop had three and Jerry Stackhouse had four. That's how basketball go, I guess.

Tim Duncan #3, April 2009

In my opinion, it was this series which saved the Mavericks. On the heels of first round exits against the Warriors and the Hornets, and staring at a third against the powerhouse Spurs, Cuban and Donnie had to be thinking about breaking it up and trying again. Instead, the Mavs kept their core intact, and within two years had made the moves-Shawn Marion, Tyson Chandler, and yes, Caron Butler and Brendan Haywood-that brought the trophy to Dallas.

But it was a weird matchup. Duncan, by this time suffering the foot injuries that most observers thought would end his career, wasn't his usual self and neither was Dirk. However, for the record books, Dirk did average 19.2 and 8.6 while Duncan averaged 19.8 and 8.0. And if anyone wants to explain to me how, in two straight playoff matchups Duncan outscored Dirk and Dirk outrebounded Duncan, be my guest.

The Mavs would go on to lose in five to the Denver Nuggets still helmed by Carmelo Anthony, but it would be one of Dirk's most brilliant series. The media, predictably, was all over Dirk in that series for saying the Nuggets guarded him well, the kind of thing mean S.O.B.s who win championships would never say, apparently. They didn't want to notice, one suspects, that Dirk's 28-10 game 1, on 55% shooting, was his worst scoring output of the series, in which he averaged 34.4 points, 11.6 rebounds, 4.0 assists, a block and a steal. He shot 53% from the floor and 92% from the line.

And, of course, that series could have been a lot closer than it was, as it almost certainly should have been 2-2 after four rather than 3-1, given the no-call on Antoine Wright wrapping up Carmelo before he could shoot a three. But, then, any series in which Dirk has to go 44-13 to win by two probably wasn't fated to go the Mavericks way.

Tim Duncan #4, April 2009

Yowza. All told, the Mavericks faced the Spurs in the playoffs 5 times and went 2-3. Not bad for a team that has one ring against the other guy's four, going for five. If you add to that the fact that of the last four, one involved a Dirk knee injury, one was a 5 game Mavericks victory, and the other two included a combined 13 games, you can get some idea of just how good those 00s Mavericks teams really were. It's this kind of thing that keeps 2006 haunting me-Dirk deserved that second ring, and to be known as one of the truly great players of the 00s. He earned his one more than most players have ever earned anything, but from a historical perspective if you could say this guy went to three conference Finals and won two rings, it's a resume up there with some of the absolute best.

However, this was the series which made it so surprising that the Spurs are right back there as one of the most dominant teams in the game. Yes, the Spurs won. But they went on to get swept by the Suns in the next round, and meanwhile Duncan managed an unimpressive (by his high standards) 18.2-9.5 to Dirk's 26.7-8.2. This included one of the great playoff performances I've ever seen, foreshadowing an even more impressive effort against the Thunder in 2011, when Dirk went 12-14, 12-12 from the stripe for 36 points and the win.

At that point, as good as Dirk still was, it certainly looked like the Mavs were on their way out, and the Spurs not too far behind them. And then...

Pau Gasol #2, May 2011

One of the things NBA commenters are worst at is context. It's what my buddy J-Tjarks tells me is the "Fundamental Attribution Error", the idea that all things are possible through the will so what's lacking is personal, not contextual.

In this case, by virtue of a steal of a trade which sent Pau Gasol to a star-studded Lakers team and to three straight Finals appearances, Mavs fans everywhere had to listen to announcers, notably Steve Kerr, wax on and on about how Pau Gasol was the best PF in the league.

But this was the series-the 2011 Mavs-Lakers series that forever disabused everyone of that impression.

And it's also the series that seemed to break Pau, on some fundamental level.

Pau's managed an even-more-unimpressive-than-it-sounds 12.5-9.3 to Dirk's 25-9 which, incidentally, included sitting out nearly all the second half of the game four blowout. It's not that Pau was disengaged, his 9 boards were impressive on a team with Bynum and he even managed 4 assists a game. It's that Dirk, in 2011, was a stone cold, killing machine. And Pau Gasol got in his way.

I have never in my life seen a player shoot 50% over the course of the season from the places Dirk shot from in 2011. He was about .02 (.393 from three) and .03 (.892 from the line) from the 40-50-90 club. In that Lakers series it was 57-73-94. And the hangover, a game 1 12-14, 24-24 from the line, 48 point effort against the Thunder was the most efficient scoring game I imagine I'll ever see.

Conclusions

There you have it, folks. Dirk Nowitzki has gone head to head, in the playoffs, against Kevin Garnett once, Pau Gasol twice, and Tim Duncan five times. He's 3-0 against Garnett and Gasol and was statistically superior in every matchup, sometimes considerably. He's 2-3 against Duncan, but that includes Dirk's first playoffs and his only major postseason injury. Duncan, in his prime, certainly had his day against Dirk, but in recent matchups there's been a draw and a statistically superior showing. In fact, this investigation reveals the startling fact that Dirk has NEVER lost a playoff game to Garnett or Gasol. He loves to play the best, and he thrives when he does.

It's worth noting, of course, that of these four guys, Dirk may be the worst defender and that by "statistics" I mean only comparably old-fashioned ones like points, boards, blocks, assists. This is especially notable with Duncan, the only guy on this list capable of matching Dirk point for point in the playoffs and of playing vastly superior defense.

I don't think there's an intelligent fan out there who doubts that Dirk's career was better than Pau's, despite Pau's additional ring. Obviously KG spent many good years in the Eastern Conference where he and Dirk never got the chance for another playoff showdown.

But (very) long story short, I think this shows pretty clearly that against the best of his era, Dirk always brought his A-game. And more often than not, he came out on top.

Link

I always thought of Dirk as a borderline top three power forward every year, no matter the postseason results. I've wanted to ask when Dirk has been indisputably the best power forward in the league? Even in his MVP season, even though he averaged 24.6/8.9/3.4 on 50.2/40.6/90.4, which is nothing short of incredible, he had a terrible shooting performance (50.9 TS%) against the 8th seeded Warriors, who weren't anything resembling elite on offense (11th) or defense (19th). Meanwhile Stoudemire averaged 20.4/9.6 on 57.5 FG%, then averaged 25.3/12.1 on 52.3 FG% in the playoffs, where the Suns would have likely knocked off the Spurs if Stoudemire hadn't been suspended for the series-clinching game 5.

There were always players like Elton Brand, Chris Webber, and even Chris Bosh, who had incredible peaks, that were better than Dirk at certain points in their career. Then there was Duncan and Garnett, both with incredible longevity and consistency (until lately), dominating most of the decade as not only the top power forwards in the league, but the best players as well. What I'm wondering is when has Dirk clearly been the best power forward in the league, like Duncan in 02-03 or Garnett in 03-04, where they also had postseason success.