where does Dirk rank among all time greatest PFs?

[Pointguard]

Also, have no idea what you are talking about for last year.

The Spurs had the 2nd best offense in the playoffs...and really that means the best because the Rockets had the best and they only played 6 games against a Blazers team that really doesn't defend.

So, uhhh....you are wrong yet again.

Also, you are going by stats again. Houston was good on paper but couldn't score when it needed to. It was also predictable and not very strong. But its proof that you can't interpret 3D reality. This is sick, really bad. This is why you are constantly lost. This is why I said go with your gut, which you could not do.

[DMAVS41]

Also, you are going by stats again. Houston was good on paper but couldn't score when it needed to. It was also predictable and not very strong. But its proof that you can't interpret 3D reality. This is sick, really bad. This is why you are constantly lost. This is why I said go with your gut, which you could not do.

I have no idea what you are talking about now.

You acted like the Spurs didn't statistically have a great offense in the playoffs. But they did.

So what is your point? Are you asking me to compare the Rockets and Spurs on offense?

It's a total tossup actually....the difference is the defense. The Spurs can play their offense and still defend very well. The Rockets can't.

You acting like there is a huge difference between the teams offensively is exactly my point. You are wrong...it's just a ****ing fact. If the Rockets defended like the Spurs they would have possibly won the title last year you ****ing clown.

[Pointguard]

I have no idea what you are talking about now.

You acted like the Spurs didn't statistically have a great offense in the playoffs. But they did.

So what is your point? Are you asking me to compare the Rockets and Spurs on offense?

It's a total tossup actually....the difference is the defense. The Spurs can play their offense and still defend very well. The Rockets can't.

You acting like there is a huge difference between the teams offensively is exactly my point. You are wrong...it's just a ****ing fact. If the Rockets defended like the Spurs they would have possibly won the title last year you ****ing clown.

Its really sad. If you think that Houston had a better flow offensively than SA your eyes are useless. In SA any of nine players could benefit from their wicked flow. In Houston, it had somewhat of a rhythm but it wasn't anything near the flow of SA. SA could get a basket from any player nearly on any part of the floor. Houston had dead spots and poor decision making, all over the floor and a lot individual play. You didn't see this???

[DMAVS41]

Its really sad. If you think that Houston had a better flow offensively than SA your eyes are useless. In SA any of nine players could benefit from their wicked flow. In Houston, it had somewhat of a rhythm but it wasn't anything near the flow of SA. SA could get a basket from any player nearly on any part of the floor. Houston had dead spots and poor decision making, all over the floor and a lot individual play. You didn't see this???

What do you mean...better flow? Of course they didn't have a better flow. The Houston offense isn't predicated on the type of movement the Spurs is.

But they score as efficiently or more efficiently than anyone in the league really.

The problem with the Rockets was not their offense...it was their defense.

It's really sad that you think what separates the Spurs and Rockets of last year was offense. Nothing could be further from the truth. It was the fact that the Rockets played absolutely no defense at all.

You really just don't get it.

[Pointguard]

What do you mean...better flow? Of course they didn't have a better flow. The Houston offense isn't predicated on the type of movement the Spurs is.

But they score as efficiently or more efficiently than anyone in the league really.

The problem with the Rockets was not their offense...it was their defense.

It's really sad that you think what separates the Spurs and Rockets of last year was offense. Nothing could be further from the truth. It was the fact that the Rockets played absolutely no defense at all.

You really just don't get it.

SA has a better offense because they can get their points from anywhere from any player from almost any spot on the floor when they need it. Slow or fast paced game. Its a full service operation that moves the ball around. You are looking at efficiency again!!! You have to put the stats down!!! Their versatility means they can adjust to anything and do more things at different points in the game. The most efficient team doesn't always win. In the playoffs, the team that adjust wins most often. Houston was predictable.

Lebron had his most efficient year last year TS% and FG%. Nobody is saying its his best year. Far from it.

[DMAVS41]

SA has a better offense because they can get their points from anywhere from any player from almost any spot on the floor when they need it. Slow or fast paced game. Its a full service operation that moves the ball around. You are looking at efficiency again!!! You have to put the stats down!!! Their versatility means they can adjust to anything and do more things at different points in the game. The most efficient team doesn't always win. In the playoffs, the team that adjust wins most often. Houston was predictable.

Lebron had his most efficient year last year TS% and FG%. Nobody is saying its his best year. Far from it.

Meh....it's not that simple.

Having go to guys like Harden and Howard in crunch time can be extremely valuable...especially in the playoffs in close games.

Again, I'm not arguing the Rockets offense was better. I'm telling you that the difference between the Spurs and Rockets last year was in no real sense the offense.

It was the defense.

So again...what is your point? That the Spurs played great offense? Yep...they did. Just like the Rockets did actually. Same thing with the Clippers. The big difference? Outside of a few caveats like the things you mention?

DEFENSE!

The Spurs had the 3rd best defense in the playoffs last year...and the 2nd best offense.

The Rockets had the 15th ranked defense and the best offense.

The Clippers had the 10th ranked defense and the 3rd best offense.

The Rockets, Clippers, and Spurs all played offense in different ways, but the end results was very comparable...where the Spurs differentiated themselves was on the other end of the floor.

The Rockets didn't lose to the Blazers because they couldn't adjust properly enough to score points. They lost because their defense was beyond pathetic. That isn't really an opinion...it's just a fact.

A team with only a positive .4 differential just isn't going to win it all. Even though the Rockets actually scored slightly better than the Spurs...they were a far worse team in the playoffs. Why? Because they gave up 10 more points per 100 possessions defensively. Had nothing to do with the offense.

Again...if the Rockets played Spurs level defense last year in the playoffs. You would have seen the Rockets and Spurs series go 7 and it would have been a total toss up who won that and then won it all.

What can't you understand about this?

Now, once you get two pretty even teams like that...then things like adjustments and consistency and continuity...etc. play a large role. But broadly...you are missing by far the biggest problem with teams like the Rockets and Clippers. Which isn't their ability to play offense...it's their ability to play defense. The fact that you keep missing this stuff in favor of your nonsensical rants above about flow and leadership and experience (for teams that don't even have any) just floors me.

Guess what. Doesn't matter the experience or leadership or adjustments...if you played the rockets vs the spurs last year....and then right before the first game...the Spurs suddenly had a defense that gave up 114 points per 100 possessions...and the Rockets had a defense that gave up 104 points per 100. The Rockets are winning that series. Doesn't matter all the intangible shit you want to throw out there....the Spurs aren't winning that series.

[Milbuck]

The Rockets offense was in no way on the Spurs' level. The stats might suggest they were but they also got bodied in the first round against a Portland team that was 17th in the league in regular season DRTG and 22nd in points allowed per game. The shot worse from the field by about 3%, they shot worse from 3 by 4%, and they just marginally outdid their scoring per game by 4 ppg in a 6 game sample size vs an 82 game sample. And again, this was against a Portland defense that was thoroughly mediocre by playoff team standards. Are they doing the same thing for 4 straight rounds? Are they doing it against teams in the playoffs that are substantially better defensively than Portland? Because I know the Spurs brought it offensively for 4 rounds, with just a few bumps on the road.

I shudder to think what Houston would've done against Memphis in the playoffs. At least Dwight was able to feast against Portland to compensate somewhat for Harden's complete meltdown, what would happen when Harden is dealing with Tony Allen and Tayshaun Prince on the perimeter, and Dwight battling with Gasol and Zbo. For a 7 game series where Memphis gets to study their opponent, feel out their offense and really lock in. What exactly is the point of having elite offensive weapons like James Harden and Dwight Howard when one half of that duo is going to shit the bed when it counts?

You can quantify 48 minutes of offense through the numbers but you have to watch the games to notice a difference in the reliability, fluidity, consistency, and overall effectiveness of an offense. And the Spurs offense at its best was on another level. We're talking about one of the most dominant offenses ever when they were clicking. I'm taking that high-powered machine over a wishy washy pseudo-star driven offense any day of the week. Judging that Spurs offense purely on stats and putting it on the same level as the Rockets is ludicrous, imo.

[navy]

Did you really say San Antonio and Houston were a tossup in offense?

San Antonio had an offensive and defensive gap from Houston. It doesnt have to be one or the other. It was both.

[Milbuck]

Did you really say San Antonio and Houston were a tossup in offense?

San Antonio had an offensive and defensive gap from Houston. It doesnt have to be one or the other. It was both.

It's times like these where stats distort the absolute shit out of what's actually going on.

That San Antonio offense was on another level compared to Houston's offense. It was obvious to anyone who consistently watched both teams in the playoffs...it's not even close when you go beyond bare points scored and efficiency numbers.

Houston played a mediocre defensive playoff team and still dropped clearly in efficiency outside of free throw shooting, with one half of its star duo completely bombing.. Again, I would've loved to see how that Houston offense stacked up against a terrific defensive team like Memphis, Indiana before they collapsed, and a playoff version of San Antonio, not the pushover early regular season version. Slightly scoring more on worse efficiency against a meh defensive team for a 6 game sample size doesn't put you on the same level as an all-time great offense like last playoffs' Spurs.

San Antonio was putting on an offensive clinic most nights. Completely blowing teams away offensively..they were a machine from top to bottom, from every angle, getting contributions from all over the court from everyone, and on a consistent basis, maximizing the talent of everyone on the roster. They were without a doubt one of the most incredibly well-executing offenses I've ever seen. And they did it for 4 straight round against better defenses than Portland. And not just better, but different..they had to adapt night after night.

[navy]

Yeah, Houston's offense isnt reliable. Even though they played good except for Harden. They basically throw it to Dwight who is a wild card offensively as you never know what you'll get and they chuck 3s. Harden with his below 40% scoring and freethrows. Just not going to carry you for 4 rounds. It would have worked in the first round against Portland if they had better defense but it wouldnt have carried them much further than that.

Eventually a team would have exposed their poor offense.

[JohnnySic]

1.) Duncan (even though he's a center, whatever)
2.) Malone
3.) Barkley
4.) KG
5.) Pettit
6.) McHale
7.) Dirk

Stop overrating Dirk already. Its incorrect and just plain pathetic.

[kenny817]

1.) Duncan (even though he's a center, whatever)
2.) Malone
3.) Barkley
4.) KG
5.) Pettit
6.) McHale
7.) Dirk

Stop overrating Dirk already. Its incorrect and just plain pathetic.

Top 7 on the all time scoring list by the time the season is over.

Jackass

[JohnnySic]

Top 7 on the all time scoring list by the time the season is over.

Jackass

And Pierce will be right behind him. I guess PP is the 2nd best small forward after Bird.

[aj1987]

And Pierce will be right behind him. I guess PP is the 2nd best small forward after Bird.

How many MVP's and All-NBA First teams does he have? How many times did he lead his teams to 50+ wins. Does he average 26/10/1/1 on 58% TS for his CAREER in the Playoffs?

Lol @ McHale being above Dirk.

[kenny817]

And Pierce will be right behind him. I guess PP is the 2nd best small forward after Bird.

Take Dirk's career resume...divide it in half

Each half > Paul Pierce's entire career