Dirk vs. Webber

[soap07]

I saw this comparison last night and I thought I'd bring it up here for discussion's sake.

In their prime, who was a better player? Dirk or CWebb?

Here are some numbers:

In Webb's best year (2000-2001): He averaged 27.1 ppg/11.1 rpg/4.2 apg.

He had a 24.7 PER, a .516 TS% and a 97 dRTG, if you buy into that stuff.

In Dirk's best year (2005-2006, surprisingly, the year before his MVP year)...

He averaged 26.6 ppg/9 RPG/2.8 APG.

He had a 28.1 PER, .589 TS%(!) and a 103 dRTG (although comparing defensive ratings across teams and different years is useless).

Tough call here - Webber seems to have been better in every part of the game except scoring, where Dirk blew him out of the water in efficiency. Thoughts?


Additionally, how come there isn't more of a clamoring for Webb to be in the HOF? Considering that Reggie is given an automatic in by many...both have five All-Star games and Webber was actually a better player who made first team All-NBA. Webber's career PER is 20.4, Reggie's is 18.4. Webber was an exceptional passer and rebounder, whereas Reggie only did one thing really well. Just a thought.

[pearljammer10]

I wish i remember more of early Webber but I was young when he was playing in his prime and dont really recall how good he actually was. Ive grown up watching Dirk so I am probably more biased towards him. Webber was one of the best if not the best passed out of the post of all time. He was more explosive going to the rim than Dirk but Dirk has the three point shot. Its a tough call because I feel that both play such incredibly different games. I believe they should both be HOFers.

[paulcowens]

Pretty much equal.  That is, I think Dirk is such an incredible clutch player that it would be an easy call to put him over Webber, except that a lot of his clutch play is due to cheap calls by the officials.  So I say equal.

[wdleehi]

Dirk


Webber was not good at the end of big games.  


Dirk has made more big plays at the end of playoff games.  

[Boris Badenov]

I saw this comparison last night and I thought I'd bring it up here for discussion's sake.

In their prime, who was a better player? Dirk or CWebb?

Here are some numbers:

In Webb's best year (2000-2001): He averaged 27.1 ppg/11.1 rpg/4.2 apg.

He had a 24.7 PER, a .516 TS% and a 97 dRTG, if you buy into that stuff.

In Dirk's best year (2005-2006, surprisingly, the year before his MVP year)...

He averaged 26.6 ppg/9 RPG/2.8 APG.

He had a 28.1 PER, .589 TS%(!) and a 103 dRTG (although comparing defensive ratings across teams and different years is useless).

Tough call here - Webber seems to have been better in every part of the game except scoring, where Dirk blew him out of the water in efficiency. Thoughts?


Additionally, how come there isn't more of a clamoring for Webb to be in the HOF? Considering that Reggie is given an automatic in by many...both have five All-Star games and Webber was actually a better player who made first team All-NBA. Webber's career PER is 20.4, Reggie's is 18.4. Webber was an exceptional passer and rebounder, whereas Reggie only did one thing really well. Just a thought.

The answer to both of your questions is the same: Webber never rose to the occasion in big games.

Even on those great Sacramento teams, Vlade was the guy they ran the offense through in the clutch, and Bibby was the guy they wanted shooting the ball.

[GreenFaith1819]

Well, those early 2000's Sacramento teams were impressive, and Webber was a big part of those.

I guess it could be argued that at least one of those Sac teams would've made it past LA to the Finals...if it were not for the alleged help from the officiating, if I'm not mistaken.

Dirk has been able to get his team to the Finals twice, now. This time, I fully expect Dirk to close the deal.

I have nothing but love for both of these players. Dirk has his second opportunity now, and I think he will take advantage of it.

[BballTim]

  Webber had 1 great year and some really good years. He was never durable and he didn't sustain his play for any length of time. I don't know that Reggie should be a shoe-in either.

[soap07]

For the Webber never rose to the occasion in big games argument...

He averaged 18.7/8.7/3.6 with a 18.9 PER....not a terrible decrease, but a decrease nonetheless.

For comparison's sake, Dirk's career playoff numbers - 25.9/10.4/2.6 assists with a 24.9 PER.

Reggie - 20.6/2.9/2.5 with a 19.5 PER.

I still don't think that this should be the be all and end all of discussions. Webber was far more versatile than either of the 3 players and was better at almost everything.

And Webber was actually literally better at everything than Reggie - including scoring, which is the one thing Reggie was known for.

Clearly, in a big spot, you'd rather have Dirk than Webber. But over the course of a whole season and a whole game, you'd probably have to take Webber. Webber was a better passer, defender and rebounder while giving up a slight amount of scoring.

[Finkelskyhook]

I saw this comparison last night and I thought I'd bring it up here for discussion's sake.

In their prime, who was a better player? Dirk or CWebb?

Here are some numbers:

In Webb's best year (2000-2001): He averaged 27.1 ppg/11.1 rpg/4.2 apg.

He had a 24.7 PER, a .516 TS% and a 97 dRTG, if you buy into that stuff.

In Dirk's best year (2005-2006, surprisingly, the year before his MVP year)...

He averaged 26.6 ppg/9 RPG/2.8 APG.

He had a 28.1 PER, .589 TS%(!) and a 103 dRTG (although comparing defensive ratings across teams and different years is useless).

Tough call here - Webber seems to have been better in every part of the game except scoring, where Dirk blew him out of the water in efficiency. Thoughts?


Additionally, how come there isn't more of a clamoring for Webb to be in the HOF? Considering that Reggie is given an automatic in by many...both have five All-Star games and Webber was actually a better player who made first team All-NBA. Webber's career PER is 20.4, Reggie's is 18.4. Webber was an exceptional passer and rebounder, whereas Reggie only did one thing really well. Just a thought.

Similar to the Iverson vs Rose debate,  here again is an example where statistics are meaningless.

Dirk has played for one franchise.  Dirk essentially became the franchise.  Webber was a malcontent journeyman who alienated coaches.   Webber shrinked at crunch time.  Dirk has grown to embrace it.

Their stats may be relative.  That's where it ends.

I'd like to see Dirk get a ring.  He's been a great player on a lot of teams.  Unfortunately, as long as Cuban is his team's owner, there's absolutely no chance of that happening.

If anybody thinks the Bulls are getting hosed....Buckle up for the Finals.

[Roy H.]

Dirk.  He had more range, was more clutch, and has made it to the Finals twice now.

[fanofgreen]

I think they both should get in the HOF.

But the difference for me is, I think the Dirk should be a shoe-in/first ballot HOF, if nothing more than for him winning the MVP, something Webber didnt do.

I think Webber should "eventually" get in, but not a shoe-in first ballot candidate.  He is in that top 2nd tier of all-time great Power Forwards, and he has the numbers,all-star games,and deep playoff runs on his resume to solidify the fact that he was more than an "above-average" player.

He wasn't a big clutch player, but I don't count that against him, because honestly 90% of most really good players aren't always clutch. (Especially Big guys 'Ewing/Robinson'). The big clutch guys are "shoe-in/first ballot" HOF guys and thats a rare small group of guys.

And we will never know how CWebb plays on the biggest stage in his prime, because of Referees.


To me Dirk is an automatic HOF'er

And CWebb is a strong deserving candidate who should get in eventually.

[soap07]

  Webber had 1 great year and some really good years. He was never durable and he didn't sustain his play for any length of time. I don't know that Reggie should be a shoe-in either.

Agreed on his lack of durability - however, I would make the case that over 831 NBA games, he ended up averaging 20 and 10...He had six seasons where he averaged 20/10, and two others where he averaged 19.5/9.1 and 21.9/9.5. That's not sustained enough for you?  

To inform the discussion - Webber was definitely injury prone. He only had six seasons where he played at least 70 games.

[housecall]

  Webber had 1 great year and some really good years. He was never durable and he didn't sustain his play for any length of time. I don't know that Reggie should be a shoe-in either.

TP,thats how i see it too.He peaked and never could stay healthy enough to lead his team close to a championship after that one great season.

[soap07]

Dirk.  He had more range, was more clutch, and has made it to the Finals twice now.

Clutch and made it to the Finals twice go hand-in-hand, no? And yes, if we grant that Dirk was a slightly better scorer, than do we not factor in defense, ball handling, passing and rebounding?

Dirk is certainly a better scorer and more clutch.

[mostofusrsad]

i'm going to have to agree here that dirk novinski is waayyy more clutch than c. webber!  for the first time it appears that novinski is prepared to carry a team on his back...they can beat that miami team, but it will be very hard!