Where does Dirk Nowitzki lie on all-time PF list?

[xtapolapacetl]

Originally Posted by Clutchshooter

Xtapolapacetl wrote:

---

Clutchshooter wrote:

---

27, 11, 4, 1, and 1.

.

how was webber not mvp? if only iverson hadnt had to drag his team to victory night in and night out.

Neither Iverson nor Webber deserved MVP that year. Shaq averaged 28.7 points, 12.7 rebounds, 3.7 assists and 2.8 blocks that year. Duncan should've been second in MVP that year BTW. And he was, except that Iveron was 1st, which should've been Shaq.

stoneface yourself. lame#$%^.

you didnt even watch basketball that year if you dont think iverson almost singlehandedly taking that crappy@ss team to a #1 seed was MVP worthy.

but you did just state that Duncan wasnt a pf on the last page so im not going to bother responding to anything else your unaware #$% has to say.



I watched plenty of basketball that year. More than you I bet. When you have the defensive player of the year, the sixth man of the year as your teammates andare being coached by the coach of the year, you're neither doing things "singlehandedly" nor playing on a "crappy@ss team". Iversonmissed 11 games that year. And in those 11 games, the Sixers had a 6-5 record. Yeah, they sure were dying without him. And yes, Iverson's 00-01 seasonwasn't more MVP worthy than Shaq's 28.7 point (on 57% shooting), 12.7 rebound, 3.7 assist and 2.8 block season.

Iif Hakeem Olajuwon isn't considered a PF, then Tim Duncan most certainly shouldn't be either. Duncan always had a "PF-C" label next to himthroughout his career. But when it comes to discussing his place among all time greats, everyone scratches the C because it's a lot nicer to say that he isthe best PF ever than the 5th or 6th best C ever.

 

[prinse3]

WOW HOLDUP

Are we debating whether AI wasnt the mvp that 2001 year? cuz that would be the stupidest *@% argument you could possibly make.

You watch that season bro??? or did you just go to basketball-reference.com and check all the big numbers that year, and throw the impressive ones around. STEPUP YOUR knowledge son. AI willed that team to victory.

you know what forget the regular season, since your memory dont serve you well. Try AI vs the Raptors in the playoffs that year, how bout 20+ points in the 4thquarter against hte bucks in the east finals.... in a game he shouldnt have even played he was so injured. in 2001, allen iverson was the man, and was the mvp-end of discussion. ANY mvp call for that year goes through him. Its really not even debatable. There have been debatable mvp years, that year aint one of em.Except if your one of those marks, who looks back at everything in hindsight, and operates under the short-term media bias.

 

[koolbarbone]

Originally Posted by PrinSe3

WOW HOLDUP

Are we debating whether AI wasnt the mvp that 2001 year? cuz that would be the stupidest *@% argument you could possibly make.

You watch that season bro??? or did you just go to basketball-reference.com and check all the big numbers that year, and throw the impressive ones around. STEP UP YOUR knowledge son. AI willed that team to victory.

you know what forget the regular season, since your memory dont serve you well. Try AI vs the Raptors in the playoffs that year, how bout 20+ points in the 4th quarter against hte bucks in the east finals.... in a game he shouldnt have even played he was so injured. in 2001, allen iverson was the man, and was the mvp- end of discussion. ANY mvp call for that year goes through him. Its really not even debatable. There have been debatable mvp years, that year aint one of em. Except if your one of those marks, who looks back at everything in hindsight, and operates under the short-term media bias.

So throwing around one game from the playoffs is a better argument? Nice rationale.

 

[xtapolapacetl]

Originally Posted by PrinSe3

WOW HOLDUP

Are we debating whether AI wasnt the mvp that 2001 year? cuz that would be the stupidest *#$ argument you could possibly make.

You watch that season bro??? or did you just go to basketball-reference.com and check all the big numbers that year, and throw the impressive ones around. STEP UP YOUR knowledge son. AI willed that team to victory.

you know what forget the regular season, since your memory dont serve you well. Try AI vs the Raptors in the playoffs that year, how bout 20+ points in the 4th quarter against hte bucks in the east finals.... in a game he shouldnt have even played he was so injured. in 2001, allen iverson was the man, and was the mvp- end of discussion. ANY mvp call for that year goes through him. Its really not even debatable. There have been debatable mvp years, that year aint one of em. Except if your one of those marks, who looks back at everything in hindsight, and operates under the short-term media bias.

Not only did Iverson shoot 39% over the 2001 NBA playoffs, but he shot that bad percentage on 30 shots per game. Do you know how many missed shots/defensiverebounds for the other team that is?

@ it not being debatable.

The Bucks series? The same Bucks series where Iverson had a 5-27 shooting game and the Sixers went away with the W. You think that a team that was as dependenton one player as you claim the 2001 Sixers were on Iverson could survive a 5-27 shooting night from that player just like that?

I don't look at that season in hindsight at all. I can assure you that this canswer period has no effect on my judgement that Shaq was and always will bethe true MVP of that season. I've said it during that season and I'll continue to say it.

 

[CP1708]

Originally Posted by PrinSe3

. AI willed that team to victory.

 

[prinse3]

I cant even believe were going over this thats why i didnt give a full breakdown. This is general knowledge.... pretty well known stuff, that AI was a FORCE in2001 whether it be playoffs, or the regular season. To KOOLBARBONE... I didnt want to give a breakdown so I just gave one example.. my bad, your right one gameis not sufficient to fortify my argument. So my bad about the one game in the playoffs thing in 01.. ill try to give you a better perspective with this: Firstoff AI played the backend of the playoffs with a left sacroiliac joint contusion which is a terrible injury for a speed oriented guard.

I am glad you realized how his missed shots led to a lot of opportunities for the opposing teams.. the end result? the other teams still lost. You hurt bythat?

Averaged 32.9 points, 4.7 rebounds, 6.1 assists and 2.4 steals in 46.2 minutes per game

( yah you read that right 46.2). Dont even give me that 39% fg percentage !+*+*!*# like you know something we dont. AI WAS A VOLUME-BASED OFFENSIVE PLAYER INHIS PRIME. EVERYONE KNOWS THAT. He needed shots to get his buckets, his offensive effeciency was solidified more by his freethrow attempts per game than hisshots. They built that offense completely around him. He needed to put up that many... oh yah my bad the sixth man of the year Mckie was averaging 11 5 and 4-a.i should have deferred to him. EXCEPT? since i know you didnt watch. most of Mckies points came off the baseline 3 that AI spoonfed him (off the baselinepenetration)
. AI was that offense! did it work? of course.... they went to the eastern conference finals.
His playoffs were filled with some games of absolute domination. He struck fear in EVERY DEFENSIVE PLAYER he faced. This is not disputed. Part of his lowpercentage were due to his off games (which his team lost) however keep in mind that He had more dominating games, hence why the sixers won every series untilthe finals. Lets take a look at some of these games

Series 1 Game 2: 45 2 9 and 2 steals
Series 2 Game 1: 36 8 4 and 7 steals
Series 2 Game 2: 54 5 4 and 1 steal
Series 2 Game 5: 52 2 7 and 4 steals
Series 3 Game 6: 46 2 3 and 2
Series 3:Game 7 44 6 7 and 2


NOW as your little assignment you can check the nba finals numbers on your own.

That is willing your team to victory and thats not even including his finals performance.

I suggest you watch the games or do something more productive than having 6000 posts on an online website ... smh ahhaha


What about hte fact that he was the number 1 guy on the only team to take a game off that PLAYOFF BEST laker team. Arguably a top 3 all time playof squad


Are you trying to tell me AI did not have a successful playoffs that year? Thats simply ludicrous, any half-wit nba fan knows what ai did in those playoffs. Idont hate on legends. Quit with the short term memory !+*+*!*#. Dont make me dig up quotes about what coaches and players said about this dude that year. Imtalkin about 01 so dont come at me about other years

 

[prinse3]

Im steppin up eh from one dude who was 6000 posts on an online forum to a dude with 11, 000 ... must be doin something right.

How you gonna laugh at AI willing that team to wins that year. Its pretty accepted. In case you forgot

- Game 5 raps

Game 2 raps

Game 6 Bucks

Game 7 Bucks

DO I REALLY NEED TO GIVE YOU THE 48 HE DROPPED ON LA? THEY LOST BUT THE BOY CARRIED THAT TEAM TO THE FINALS. They could have lost in game 7 to the bucks butnopee

So those are examples of AI willing that team to victory. 4 of em, i can find more... but if your talkin 01 playoffs your just stupid if you dont recognizethis guys domination

 

[CP1708]

Originally Posted by PrinSe3

I cant even believe were going over this thats why i didnt give a full breakdown. This is general knowledge.... pretty well known stuff, that AI was a FORCE in 2001 whether it be playoffs, or the regular season. To KOOLBARBONE... I didnt want to give a breakdown so I just gave one example.. my bad, your right one game is not sufficient to fortify my argument. So my bad about the one game in the playoffs thing in 01.. ill try to give you a better perspective with this: First off AI played the backend of the playoffs with a left sacroiliac joint contusion which is a terrible injury for a speed oriented guard.

I am glad you realized how his missed shots led to a lot of opportunities for the opposing teams.. the end result? the other teams still lost. You hurt by that?

Averaged 32.9 points, 4.7 rebounds, 6.1 assists and 2.4 steals in 46.2 minutes per game

( yah you read that right 46.2). Dont even give me that 39% fg percentage !+*+*!*# like you know something we dont. AI WAS A VOLUME-BASED OFFENSIVE PLAYER IN HIS PRIME. EVERYONE KNOWS THAT. He needed shots to get his buckets, his offensive effeciency was solidified more by his freethrow attempts per game than his shots. They built that offense completely around him. He needed to put up that many... oh yah my bad the sixth man of the year Mckie was averaging 11 5 and 4- a.i should have deferred to him. EXCEPT? since i know you didnt watch. most of Mckies points came off the baseline 3 that AI spoonfed him (off the baseline penetration)
. AI was that offense! did it work? of course.... they went to the eastern conference finals.
His playoffs were filled with some games of absolute domination. He struck fear in EVERY DEFENSIVE PLAYER he faced. This is not disputed. Part of his low percentage were due to his off games (which his team lost) however keep in mind that He had more dominating games, hence why the sixers won every series until the finals. Lets take a look at some of these games

Series 1 Game 2: 45 2 9 and 2 steals
Series 2 Game 1: 36 8 4 and 7 steals
Series 2 Game 2: 54 5 4 and 1 steal
Series 2 Game 5: 52 2 7 and 4 steals
Series 3 Game 6: 46 2 3 and 2
Series 3:Game 7 44 6 7 and 2


NOW as your little assignment you can check the nba finals numbers on your own.

That is willing your team to victory and thats not even including his finals performance.

I suggest you watch the games or do something more productive than having 6000 posts on an online website ... smh ahhaha


What about hte fact that he was the number 1 guy on the only team to take a game off that PLAYOFF BEST laker team. Arguably a top 3 all time playof squad


Are you trying to tell me AI did not have a successful playoffs that year? Thats simply ludicrous, any half-wit nba fan knows what ai did in those playoffs. I dont hate on legends. Quit with the short term memory !+*+*!*#. Dont make me dig up quotes about what coaches and players said about this dude that year. Im talkin about 01 so dont come at me about other years

What does all this postseason stuff have to do with a regular season MVP? Just wondering.

 

[prinse3]

Iverson in 01

 

[CP1708]

Originally Posted by PrinSe3

Im steppin up eh from one dude who was 6000 posts on an online forum to a dude with 11, 000 ... must be doin something right.


DO I REALLY NEED TO GIVE YOU THE 48 HE DROPPED ON LA? THEY LOST BUT THE BOY CARRIED THAT TEAM TO THE FINALS. They could have lost in game 7 to the bucks but nopee

So those are examples of AI willing that team to victory. 4 of em, i can find more... but if your talkin 01 playoffs your just stupid if you dont recognize this guys domination

You a funny guy, I like you. You live for now.

 

[prinse3]

it was a counterargument to that Xsdfjlksdflsj dude trying to discredit iverson's playoff dominance in 01.

it has absolutely nothing to do with the regular season. Nt just gets too stupid at some point and im forced to respond

 

[prinse3]

Yah but CP im serious... ill ride with you on the nash argument 50% of the way, but #!$$ anyone trying to discredit historic playoff battles.

im all about nba history, moments and especially the playoffs, and one thing in 01 is for sure. You dont #!$$ with AI in the playoffs in 01. Same way you dontpiss off vernon maxwell if your a fan, or piss off chris mills if your anybody

 

[CP1708]

at the Chris Mills quip.

Hey, I've battled with Xtrap a bunch on here, but in this case, he has a point. Iverson was great that year, but it's not crazy to look over at Shaqduring that period.

To me, Shaq's biggest weakness that year would have been Kobe. Iverson obviously didn't have that sidekick, but it did seem like the media that yearwas all about giving every 6er on the team an award. What I thought was a team picture was actually the NBA awards that year.

Either way, I'm not worried about who won that year. No big deal. But the whole argument about "willed his team to win" is ridiculous. Alwayshas been, always will be.

Can you say that a guy wills his team to win? Sure, yes you can. Can you quantify it and give it an award, no, no you can't. Iverson's"will" is no more then Shaq's "will" or Duncan's "will" or Kobe's "will". Great players fight to the wireto win, that's all. No one, more then the other. Malone and Stockton had just as much "will" as MJ did. MJ was just better.

 

[koolbarbone]

Even though this argument has run way off course, Iverson was a beast in the playoffs. With that said, it's irrelevant to the MVP. In actuality, you canmake an argument for Shaq the same way that you could for Iverson winning the award. I'm not in favor of saying that anyone who thinks otherwise wasn'twatching basketball that year. Iverson was helped by the media more than anyone in 2001 for "refusing to quit" or "finally buying into LarryBrown's system."

If I were voting I'd probably give the award to Iverson because what he did with that team was remarkable. The fact that he had help in Larry Brown andAaron McKie is misleading since Iverson played a huge part in their respective awards and Dikembe wasn't even on their team for most the season. Obviously,you could make a strong case for Shaq too, but his chances to win decreased significantly by him winning the previous year and, let's face it, the medialoves an underdog story.

 

[prinse3]

^i can agree with both of your opinions above.... but thats not what irked me about the other dudes points. The fact that he tried discrediting a historicplayoffs did that to me

 

[JD617]

Shaq was robbed of that MVP in '01. Coming from a Celtics fan/Laker hater.

Obviously, you could make a strong case for Shaq too, but his chances to win decreased significantly by him winning the previous year and, let's face it, the media loves an underdog story.
Exactly.

 

[grittyman20]

So Dirk still in the top top eh?

 

[japanair21]

What's this about Shaq and AI.

Neither are PF's.

And Dirk takes more of the big shots than Webber OR KG, but like I said, I'm fine with Dirk being below KG, I have no gripes with that at all.

IF Dirk wins a ring, an argument can be made for him and KG being a lot closer than they are right now. KG went through seasons where the T-Wolves weren'tmaking the Playoffs, where they got beat in the first round, etc. Dirk continually gets his team into the Playoffs. Yeah he got bounced in the first round 3times, the GSW one is inexcusable and we had a terrible match there. Kidd was new to DAL when we faced the Hornets, and I said all along he needed more time togel with the guys. Back in 04 we just had a terrible match-up with Sacramento. Other than that.. two WCF trips, and one Finals trip.

 

[polosnjs]

Dirk is the best shooter of All-Time from the PF position. Definitely makes my top ten of all time.

 

[flintgrey]

As a whole, I think most are in agreement on TD 1, Malone 2, Barkley 3....its the next three that are for debate between McHale, KG and Dirk.

Originally Posted by JapanAir21

If you want to consider Webber, let's get Grant Hill in the discussion of all-time greats too.

STTTTTTRRRREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEETCH!

and Grant Hill is/was a small forward, not a PF

 

[japanair21]

Originally Posted by FLINTGREY

Originally Posted by JapanAir21

If you want to consider Webber, let's get Grant Hill in the discussion of all-time greats too.

STTTTTTRRRREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEETCH!

and Grant Hill is/was a small forward, not a PF

I was being sarcastic about Grant Hill, because honestly Chirs Webber has no business being in this discussion.

 

[halfwaycrook]

Webber discussion is serious...?

And even though Im a Celtics guy

How Dirk can take over a game, puts him above KG.

 

[bballah3]

Originally Posted by HalfwayCROOK

Webber discussion is serious...?

And even though Im a Celtics guy

How Dirk can take over a game, puts him above KG.

How old are you? 15?

 

[bballah3]

I would put Dirk at #10 all time.


1. Duncan
2. Malone
3. Pettit
4. Mchale
5. KG
6. Barkley
7. Hayes
8. McAdoo
9. Rodman
10. Dirk

Jerry Lucas could also be thrown in there.

 

[bigmike23]

so why cant webber be in this discussion?