Highest reasonable ranking for Dirk Nowitzki?

[Texas Chuck]

It's a hard discussion, since the teams were arranged a lot around Dirk, and Kobe would be overlapping with Finley for a chunk of it, which neuters some of the team value, too, right? The Mavs were an all-O, no-D team for a long time. It would be interesting to see what Kobe did with that. Less than he did with his Lakers, for sure, but that's... not really surprising, because of fit and roster talent.

Eh, Dallas lacked a SF during the Finley years and played a lot of 3 guard lineups with Fin at 4 and Dirk at 5. There would have been zero issues finding a spot for Kobe. Now those Nash teams had a bunch of offensive talent so Kobe would have to share a bit more than he did in LA with largely just one other high usage guy on his teams.

But Dallas stopped being an all-offensive team with the 04-05 season. Dirk retired in 2019. So the majority of his career was played on pretty solid defensive teams. For instance from 02-12 Dallas was a top third of the league defensive team all but 2 seasons. Never a great defensive team, but definitely shouldn't be called all-O, no D post Nash/Nellie because its simply inaccurate.


Anyway zero interest in a Kobe v Dirk debate, but did want to clarify that there is a clear misconception about what the Dallas teams were like around Dirk based on how his career started. Dallas made a clear pivot away from Nellie ball and even under Rick Carlisle never really went back--they just got bad at basketball as Dirk got old.

[LAL1947]

PC board's latest top 100 project has Dirk at 15 which seems reasonable. I'd rank him higher though because I feel there's a value Dirk provided that hasn't yet been captured by advanced metrics afaik. I'm just going by eye test and intuition here but it seemed like Dirk had a historically low variance to his impact coupled with a historically high "midrange gravity" which translated to sustained high-level basketball regardless of teammates, rules, opposing defenses, whatever

Value in what sense? And how so, relative to the guys at that level? What does he have that they don't, and which overcomes what they have and he doesn't?

Dirk was certainly quite portable from the early 2000s forward into the early 2010s. He lasted into his later career quite well, settled nicely into the mid-post and did work. But at some point as you near the top of the mountain, your quality as a player starts to be less stand-out as you put yourself shoulder to shoulder with the titans of the game, you know what I mean? And accomplishments and achievements do start to matter, because there are few other ways to separate people at that very upper echelon. Also, what we know about how the game works suggests that there is only so much value to someone who scores efficiently on decent but not huge volume and isn't a robust playmaker for others, nor a top-tier defender. There's a cap to that value, particularly when he isn't alone in the league in terms of his scoring efficiency. I'm playing DA here, because I think Dirk is a pretty top top 15/20 kind of guy, but just to extend the conversation and explore your ideas.

That's really very well put.

If I may nit-pick just a tiny bit, I think you're being a little too polite or respectful by using the terms "not a robust playmaker" and "nor a top-tier defender". Sorry if I'm being banal but to phrase it the way you have, well, it helps paint both those abilities in a better light than it should and helps put him closer to the titans of the game (Top 10-12 guys) when there is clear separation between them and him to me. I'm even unsure of whether I can put him over others in my Top 20, who had more overall two-way ability (score, defend) or three-way ability (score, defense, play-make).

John Stockton is an example... it's been mentioned by a few that Dirk was clearly better than him. I'm not sure if I can agree with them because Stockton was a mediocre scorer but an actual play-maker and a top-tier defender (please correct me if I'm classifying him wrongly as a defender. I know Stockton had problems with bigger and faster guards but having the most steals ever is still an accomplishment). It seems to me Stockton was better enough at both those things that the difference between his lower ability to score and Dirk's higher ability to score doesn't make Dirk definitively better. It's so very close between players at this level... comparing them starts getting very murky. I'm one of those who doesn't hold the lack of a title against Stockton or Malone btw.

[tsherkin]

Anyway zero interest in a Kobe v Dirk debate, but did want to clarify that there is a clear misconception about what the Dallas teams were like around Dirk based on how his career started. Dallas made a clear pivot away from Nellie ball and even under Rick Carlisle never really went back--they just got bad at basketball as Dirk got old.

Yes, this is all true. I just meant that most of his first seven seasons were under Nellie, so it defined a large chunk of his career. Not the whole thing

If I may nit-pick just a tiny bit, I think you're being a little too polite or respectful by using the terms "not a robust playmaker" and "nor a top-tier defender". Sorry if I'm being banal but to phrase it the way you have, well, it helps paint both those abilities in a better light than it should and helps put him closer to the titans of the game (Top 10-12 guys) when there is clear separation between them and him to me. I'm even unsure of whether I can put him over others in my Top 20, who had more overall two-way ability (score, defend) or three-way ability (score, defense, play-make).

He wasn't a PnR spammer or a major perimeter isolation player. But he matched off that lack by not getting in the way of such players with his offense, so it sort of works out in the end. PLus, as Tex noted, he was actually a quality passer from his spots.

John Stockton is an example... it's been mentioned by a few that Dirk was clearly better than him. I'm not sure if I can agree with them because Stockton was a mediocre scorer but an actual play-maker and a top-tier defender (please correct me if I'm classifying him wrongly as a defender. I know Stockton had problems with bigger and faster guards but having the most steals ever is still an accomplishment). It seems to me Stockton was better enough at both those things that the difference between his lower ability to score and Dirk's higher ability to score doesn't make Dirk definitively better. It's so very close between players at this level... comparing them starts getting very murky. I'm one of those who doesn't hold the lack of a title against Stockton or Malone btw.

Stockton is a whole separate conversation. He is often overrated a little by his volume assist production; he was kind of the king of the Rondo assist before Rondo, and his longevity, while remarkable, doesn't speak to his value added as far as title contention. And his utility as a scoring threat diminished against more serious defenses. A very good player who maximized his abilities, but sometimes spoken of a little more highly than he should be (IMHO) as a way of diminishing Malone, I think.