PDA

View Full Version : Tim Duncan reportedly hates KG



spreadeagle
05-17-2012, 07:09 PM
Bolded part made me laugh
He can’t stand Kevin Garnett. Which makes me want a Celtics vs. Spurs NBA finals all the more.

It’s not hard to imagine the intense-but-reserved Duncan clashing with the intense-in-your-face Garnett. Here is what Ballard wrote.

In fact, Duncan hates Kevin Garnett. Hates him the way liberals hate Sean Hannity. This information comes from very reliable sources, who talk about how KG has made a career of trying to punk Duncan, baiting him and slapping him and whispering really weird smack into his ear. They talk about how funny this is, because the worst thing you can do as an opponent is piss off Duncan. Then, as Malik Rose says, “he f—— destroys you.” Duncan’s lifetime numbers versus Garnett’s teams, by the way: 19.4 points per game, 11.6 boards and a 44–17 record, including the postseason.

Duncan is diplomatic about the topic. Asked if perhaps all those years battling Garnett have softened his feelings for the man, led to a Magic-Larry type of kinship, Duncan leans back on the couch in his hotel room and grins. There is a pause. A longer pause. Finally he says, “Define kinship.”Come on basketball gods, you robbed us of Derrick Rose these playoffs. You’ve made us suffer through the first two games of Indiana Boston. You’ve exacted your pound of flesh. Can you at least give us Duncan vs. Garnett now? Please.

http://probasketballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/05/17/tim-duncan-reportedly-hates-kevin-garnett/

Htownballa1622
05-17-2012, 07:10 PM
Tim and I both.

Cubs Win
05-17-2012, 07:12 PM
Even more of a reason to like Duncan! Garnett's a *****.

4 POINT PLAY LJ
05-17-2012, 07:13 PM
Duncan= 4 or more whatever rings
Garnett= 1

GiantsSwaGG
05-17-2012, 07:15 PM
Who doesn't?

Alayla
05-17-2012, 07:21 PM
this isnt a shock there the best 2 PFs in there era i mean come on

John Walls Era
05-17-2012, 07:26 PM
Probably had a lot of battles in the west. But it seems he hates him, but not in the respectful rivalry way.

b@llhog24
05-17-2012, 07:26 PM
Lmao this is awesome.

bagwell368
05-17-2012, 07:29 PM
"Duncan’s lifetime numbers versus Garnett’s teams, by the way: 19.4 points per game, 11.6 boards and a 44–17 record, including the postseason."

Rubbish w/o a comparison of the winning percentage of the teams they were on. And rubbish w/o Garnetts stats included.

BR says:

Head to Head inc playoffs: 29-19 in favor of Duncan, not 44-17 (what is the source of the writer?)

Stat Duncan Garnett

PPG: 19.9 - 20.6
RPG: 12.2 - 11.1
AST: 3.3 - 4.3
STL: 0.5 - 1.4
BLK: 1.9 - 2.0

Given the difference in teams, I find it hard to say that Duncan is better then Garnett. Reverse the players and the Title count is liable to be the same.

kdspurman
05-17-2012, 07:29 PM
I posted this in another thread already, the whole article is pretty sweet. You guys should check it out.

http://forums.prosportsdaily.com/showthread.php?t=720796

kdspurman
05-17-2012, 07:30 PM
"Duncan’s lifetime numbers versus Garnett’s teams, by the way: 19.4 points per game, 11.6 boards and a 44–17 record, including the postseason."

Rubbish w/o a comparison of the winning percentage of the teams they were on. And rubbish w/o Garnetts stats included.

BR says:

Head to Head inc playoffs: 29-19 in favor of Duncan, not 44-17 (what is your source?)

Stat Duncan Garnett

PPG: 19.9 - 20.6
RPG: 12.2 - 11.1
AST: 3.3 - 4.3
STL: 0.5 - 1.4
BLK: 1.9 - 2.0

Given the difference in teams, I find it hard to say that Duncan is better then Garnett. Reverse the players and the Title count is liable to be the same.

Doubtful tbh

bagwell368
05-17-2012, 07:32 PM
Doubtful tbh

Cite your proof, otherwise its just opinion.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/h2h_finder.cgi?request=1&p1=garneke01&p2=duncati01#stats

OC Knights #11
05-17-2012, 07:33 PM
Who doesn't hate Garnett?

kdspurman
05-17-2012, 07:34 PM
And this goes deeper than on the court I think

Years ago-

Supposedly, KG came up to Tim during the game on Mother's Day and wished him a happy mother's day. Most folks know Tim's mom died when he was 14.

For the record, that game (Game 1) was on May 9, 1999, which just happened to be Mother's Day, 1999 leading to a pretty good supposition that if Garnett was ever going to wish Timmy a Happy Mother's Day, it was that day. (curiously, the T'Wolves were almost always out of the playoffs by Mother's Day in other years and when they were in at that juncture (2004), they were playing the Kings and not the Spurs).

That's the game it supposedly happened. Supposedly, when Duncan was shooting free throws, Garnett said, "Happy Mother's Day, mother ****er."

Also this sweet quote from Artest-

Artest explained: "I remember one time Kevin Garnett was mushing him, and shoving him in the face; and Tim Duncan didn't do anything, he didn't react. He just kicked Kevin Garnett's a--, and won the damn championship. You know what I'm sayin'? That's gangsta. Everybody can show emotion, dunk on somebody, scream and be real cocky; but Tim Duncan is a ... he's a pimp."
__________________

smith&wesson
05-17-2012, 07:38 PM
not suprised. they are very different!!

duncan is calm, cool, collective, under control

garnet is intense & emotional

Hangtime
05-17-2012, 07:39 PM
Two of the best in their era and two first ballot HOF. And they had their fair share of battles. Fierce competitors of their caliber usually do.

kdspurman
05-17-2012, 07:42 PM
Cite your proof, otherwise its just opinion.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/h2h_finder.cgi?request=1&p1=garneke01&p2=duncati01#stats

It's my Opinion KG would not have dominated against the 03 Lakers like Timmy did. And lead that team to a title, while making his teammates better.

It's my Opinion KG would not have taken over game 7 in 05 against the Pistons. And lead the charge, and take the team on his back.

Why? Because Timmy's overall play excelled in the playoffs.

Can't ONLY look at #'s here, cause Tim's personality and leadership gained the trust of his teammates & coaching staff. People don't realize that personality, chemistry, and fitting the right personnel are vital to a team's success.

b@llhog24
05-17-2012, 07:48 PM
And this goes deeper than on the court I think

Years ago-

Supposedly, KG came up to Tim during the game on Mother's Day and wished him a happy mother's day. Most folks know Tim's mom died when he was 14.

For the record, that game (Game 1) was on May 9, 1999, which just happened to be Mother's Day, 1999 leading to a pretty good supposition that if Garnett was ever going to wish Timmy a Happy Mother's Day, it was that day. (curiously, the T'Wolves were almost always out of the playoffs by Mother's Day in other years and when they were in at that juncture (2004), they were playing the Kings and not the Spurs).

That's the game it supposedly happened. Supposedly, when Duncan was shooting free throws, Garnett said, "Happy Mother's Day, mother ****er."

Also this sweet quote from Artest-

Artest explained: "I remember one time Kevin Garnett was mushing him, and shoving him in the face; and Tim Duncan didn't do anything, he didn't react. He just kicked Kevin Garnett's a--, and won the damn championship. You know what I'm sayin'? That's gangsta. Everybody can show emotion, dunk on somebody, scream and be real cocky; but Tim Duncan is a ... he's a pimp."
__________________

Wow Kg is a POS. :pity:

bagwell368
05-17-2012, 07:50 PM
It's my Opinion KG would not have dominated against the 03 Lakers like Timmy did. And lead that team to a title, while making his teammates better.

It's my Opinion KG would not have taken over game 7 in 05 against the Pistons. And lead the charge, and take the team on his back.

Why? Because Timmy's overall play excelled in the playoffs.

Can't ONLY look at #'s here, cause Tim's personality and leadership gained the trust of his teammates & coaching staff. People don't realize that personality, chemistry, and fitting the right personnel are vital to a team's success.

Off of this, your mind is made up to suit your preference. Opinion yes - objectivity - doubtful.

greg_ory_2005
05-17-2012, 07:52 PM
He's definitely not the first person to hate Garnett.

kdspurman
05-17-2012, 07:59 PM
Off of this, your mind is made up to suit your preference. Opinion yes - objectivity - doubtful.

I wonder if you thought this before he went to boston tbh

NYY 26 to 7
05-17-2012, 08:01 PM
Cite your proof, otherwise its just opinion.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/h2h_finder.cgi?request=1&p1=garneke01&p2=duncati01#stats

Stats don't equal proof - "lies, damn lies, and statistics" statistics are meant to be used in context with other confounding factors to build strength for a case. Stats are not an absolute for anything. Intangibles count and Duncan was the right kind of leader for that team a guy respected by everyone, extremely mature from college on, and just a winner. Garnett did not have a great rep and could not get his team out of the 1st round despite having great regular season teams. Why do people revise history once a guy finally gets a ring?

Giraffes Rule
05-17-2012, 08:01 PM
Cite your proof, otherwise its just opinion.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/h2h_finder.cgi?request=1&p1=garneke01&p2=duncati01#stats

Lol you're calling out for proof when you're just doing silly conjectures yourself.

KnicksorBust
05-17-2012, 08:05 PM
Off of this, your mind is made up to suit your preference. Opinion yes - objectivity - doubtful.

Tim Duncan has one significant advantage over KG. He gets BETTER in the playoffs.

Regular Season PER:
Duncan - 24.7
Garnett - 23.3

Playoffs PER:
Duncan - 25.4
Garnett - 22.0

Regular Season Stats:
Duncan - 20.3ppg/11.3rpg/3.1apg/2.2bpg shooting splits 51/18/69 with TS% 55
Garnett - 19.3ppg/10.6rpg/4.0apg/1.5bpg shooting splits 50/28/79 with TS% 55

Playoffs Stats:
Duncan - 22.5ppg/12.3rpg/3.4apg/2.6bpg shooting splits 50/16/68 with TS% 56
Garnett - 19.7ppg/11.1rpg/3.7apg/1.4bpg shooting splits 48/31/79 with TS% 52.5

Duncan comes up big in the playoffs and KG has been known as a choke artist his whole career until he came to Boston. Hell he even had some disasterous games on the way to their 1 title until saving his reputation with a great Game 7. There's nothing about KG's first 10 seasons that makes me believe he could have carried a team to 4 titles the way Duncan did.

kdspurman
05-17-2012, 08:11 PM
Tim Duncan has one significant advantage over KG. He gets BETTER in the playoffs.

Regular Season PER:
Duncan - 24.7
Garnett - 23.3

Playoffs PER:
Duncan - 25.4
Garnett - 22.0

Regular Season Stats:
Duncan - 20.3ppg/11.3rpg/3.1apg/2.2bpg shooting splits 51/18/69 with TS% 55
Garnett - 19.3ppg/10.6rpg/4.0apg/1.5bpg shooting splits 50/28/79 with TS% 55

Playoffs Stats:
Duncan - 22.5ppg/12.3rpg/3.4apg/2.6bpg shooting splits 50/16/68 with TS% 56
Garnett - 19.7ppg/11.1rpg/3.7apg/1.4bpg shooting splits 48/31/79 with TS% 52.5

Duncan comes up big in the playoffs and KG has been known as a choke artist his whole career until he came to Boston. Hell he even had some disasterous games on the way to their 1 title until saving his reputation with a great Game 7. There's nothing about KG's first 10 seasons that makes me believe he could have carried a team to 4 titles the way Duncan did.

That's what I said, though I didn't put all the stats out. Thanks for posting :cheers:

kdspurman
05-17-2012, 08:11 PM
Lol you're calling out for proof when you're just doing silly conjectures yourself.

Ironic isn't it :rolleyes:

b@llhog24
05-17-2012, 08:13 PM
Tim Duncan has one significant advantage over KG. He gets BETTER in the playoffs.

Regular Season PER:
Duncan - 24.7
Garnett - 23.3

Playoffs PER:
Duncan - 25.4
Garnett - 22.0

Regular Season Stats:
Duncan - 20.3ppg/11.3rpg/3.1apg/2.2bpg shooting splits 51/18/69 with TS% 55
Garnett - 19.3ppg/10.6rpg/4.0apg/1.5bpg shooting splits 50/28/79 with TS% 55

Playoffs Stats:
Duncan - 22.5ppg/12.3rpg/3.4apg/2.6bpg shooting splits 50/16/68 with TS% 56
Garnett - 19.7ppg/11.1rpg/3.7apg/1.4bpg shooting splits 48/31/79 with TS% 52.5

Duncan comes up big in the playoffs and KG has been known as a choke artist his whole career until he came to Boston. Hell he even had some disasterous games on the way to their 1 title until saving his reputation with a great Game 7. There's nothing about KG's first 10 seasons that makes me believe he could have carried a team to 4 titles the way Duncan did.

Basically this; even Hawkeye has noted this.

Catfish1314
05-17-2012, 08:13 PM
I didn't know Tim Duncan was capable of hatred.

KnicksorBust
05-17-2012, 08:13 PM
That's what I said, though I did put all the stats out. Thanks for posting :cheers:

No problem. It was an opportunity to point out how great Duncan was (one of my 5 favorite non-Knicks of all-time) and get into a debate with Bagwell. I couldn't help myself. :)

KnicksorBust
05-17-2012, 08:14 PM
I didn't know Tim Duncan was capable of hatred.

Says the Tim Duncan of redrafts. :laugh: j/k

Catfish1314
05-17-2012, 08:16 PM
Tim Duncan has one significant advantage over KG. He gets BETTER in the playoffs.

Regular Season PER:
Duncan - 24.7
Garnett - 23.3

Playoffs PER:
Duncan - 25.4
Garnett - 22.0

Regular Season Stats:
Duncan - 20.3ppg/11.3rpg/3.1apg/2.2bpg shooting splits 51/18/69 with TS% 55
Garnett - 19.3ppg/10.6rpg/4.0apg/1.5bpg shooting splits 50/28/79 with TS% 55

Playoffs Stats:
Duncan - 22.5ppg/12.3rpg/3.4apg/2.6bpg shooting splits 50/16/68 with TS% 56
Garnett - 19.7ppg/11.1rpg/3.7apg/1.4bpg shooting splits 48/31/79 with TS% 52.5

Duncan comes up big in the playoffs and KG has been known as a choke artist his whole career until he came to Boston. Hell he even had some disasterous games on the way to their 1 title until saving his reputation with a great Game 7. There's nothing about KG's first 10 seasons that makes me believe he could have carried a team to 4 titles the way Duncan did.

I completely agree that Duncan is and really always has been better than Garnett, but I've never thought of Garnett as a choke artist and never read/seen/heard any such suggestion. Maybe I was under a rock at some point during his career or maybe it's that I witnessed him essentially obliterate us in the 2004 West Semis. Just curious.

Super.
05-17-2012, 08:22 PM
Duncan= 4 or more whatever rings
Garnett= 1

And who was the supporting casts for each team?

Yankees22
05-17-2012, 08:24 PM
"Duncan’s lifetime numbers versus Garnett’s teams, by the way: 19.4 points per game, 11.6 boards and a 44–17 record, including the postseason."

Rubbish w/o a comparison of the winning percentage of the teams they were on. And rubbish w/o Garnetts stats included.

BR says:

Head to Head inc playoffs: 29-19 in favor of Duncan, not 44-17 (what is the source of the writer?)

Stat Duncan Garnett

PPG: 19.9 - 20.6
RPG: 12.2 - 11.1
AST: 3.3 - 4.3
STL: 0.5 - 1.4
BLK: 1.9 - 2.0

Given the difference in teams, I find it hard to say that Duncan is better then Garnett. Reverse the players and the Title count is liable to be the same.


You can't be serious...

Meaze_Gibson
05-17-2012, 08:32 PM
I completely agree that Duncan is and really always has been better than Garnett, but I've never thought of Garnett as a choke artist and never read/seen/heard any such suggestion. Maybe I was under a rock at some point during his career or maybe it's that I witnessed him essentially obliterate us in the 2004 West Semis. Just curious.

Yeah Garnett was known for passing in the 4th quarter instead of taking the shot. You would see him pass out to guys like Troy Hudson and you'd be confused. Tim Duncan, as you say, was a different animal than Garnett tho.

Corey
05-17-2012, 09:16 PM
Everyone hates KG.

KnicksorBust
05-17-2012, 09:17 PM
I completely agree that Duncan is and really always has been better than Garnett, but I've never thought of Garnett as a choke artist and never read/seen/heard any such suggestion. Maybe I was under a rock at some point during his career or maybe it's that I witnessed him essentially obliterate us in the 2004 West Semis. Just curious.

You are remembering that season correctly but you have to realize that is one series out of almost a decade of disappointing season finishes. Ripped from the Book of Basketball:

"The T-Wolves got knocked out of the first round in Garnett's first seven Playoffs appearances. In nine elimination games over that stretch (Minny won two of them), Garnett averaged 18-11-6 and shot 40 percent. In his only Game 5 ('98 against Seattle), KG practically crapped himself with 7 points, 4 rebounds, and 10 TOs. Things turned during his MVP season in 2004, when Garnett had a certified monster Game 7 (a 32-21 against the Kings) before Cassell got injured and they fell to the Lakers. Then the Spree/Cassell dynamic imploded, Minnesota made all the wrong moves to replace them (Ricky Davis and Marko Jaric, anyone?) and Garnett became the only top forty Pyramid guy to miss the playoffs for three straight years."

PAOboston
05-17-2012, 09:25 PM
i think they are polar opposites on how they go about performing. duncan is quiet and doesnt let his emotions show. kg is wired the exact opposite. either way, w/e makes them tick, it works. easily the 2 best player at the pf position of their generation (even though duncan did play center for a bit of it).

as for the entire kg/duncan championships debate: i think it's a fruitless endeavor. duncan did have better supporting casts than garnett. if they switched would they have had the same effect? who knows.

Hawkeye15
05-17-2012, 09:34 PM
I am a Wolves fan and I hate KG. Sorry, he was given a pass for being an *** hole when he was the underdog with no help, but when he did get a great roster around him, he became the bully wanna-be (don't think he could take my sister in a fight).

lakersfan01
05-17-2012, 09:37 PM
Who doesn't hate KG? He's an *******. I love the way he plays, but I hate him as a person. It comes as no surprise that KG is one of Kobe Bryant's best friends in the NBA.

KnicksorBust
05-17-2012, 09:39 PM
I am a Wolves fan and I hate KG. Sorry, he was given a pass for being an *** hole when he was the underdog with no help, but when he did get a great roster around him, he became the bully wanna-be (don't think he could take my sister in a fight).

Your sister must be butch as **** to take on a pro athlete. Good for her.

bagwell368
05-17-2012, 09:41 PM
Tim Duncan has one significant advantage over KG. He gets BETTER in the playoffs.

Regular Season PER:
Duncan - 24.7
Garnett - 23.3

Playoffs PER:
Duncan - 25.4
Garnett - 22.0

Regular Season Stats:
Duncan - 20.3ppg/11.3rpg/3.1apg/2.2bpg shooting splits 51/18/69 with TS% 55
Garnett - 19.3ppg/10.6rpg/4.0apg/1.5bpg shooting splits 50/28/79 with TS% 55

Playoffs Stats:
Duncan - 22.5ppg/12.3rpg/3.4apg/2.6bpg shooting splits 50/16/68 with TS% 56
Garnett - 19.7ppg/11.1rpg/3.7apg/1.4bpg shooting splits 48/31/79 with TS% 52.5

Duncan comes up big in the playoffs and KG has been known as a choke artist his whole career until he came to Boston. Hell he even had some disasterous games on the way to their 1 title until saving his reputation with a great Game 7. There's nothing about KG's first 10 seasons that makes me believe he could have carried a team to 4 titles the way Duncan did.

Try some perspective...

On a poor team like Minny was in many years, what do other teams do? Ever hear of a double team? Packing the paint? Dropping guys down on him?

Duncan's Spurs was much more balanced. How much could you afford to double Duncan constantly?

Try taking a look at the 2007-2008 Celts. The improvement on D across the board led by KG (even Ray Allen played D) is as far as I know - w/o precedent. KG's regular mammoth regular season - best on that team. Look at the playoffs that year. OK, so, with more options on that team then he had in Minny, did he not come up big? KG outplayed PP in the playoffs, just not in the Finals. Oh well. I'm sure you can come up with some snarky comment to stand in the way of actually thinking about what's in front of you.

bagwell368
05-17-2012, 09:43 PM
You can't be serious...

Penetrating and clear question. Yanks fan hunh? Unh Hunh.

Hawkeye15
05-17-2012, 09:51 PM
Your sister must be butch as **** to take on a pro athlete. Good for her.

I am the coach from Dazed and Confused.

In all seriousness, KG isn't a fighter. That much is obvious.

HowBoutDemBulls
05-17-2012, 09:56 PM
And who doesn't?
KG is one of those dudes that needs to get the fcuk beat out of him once. He's a fake tough guy for sure.

kdspurman
05-17-2012, 09:57 PM
I am the coach from Dazed and Confused.

In all seriousness, KG isn't a fighter. That much is obvious.

I wish it was still on YouTube but back in his Raptor's days, it shows KG backing away from Bonner... Classic :laugh2:

--23--
05-17-2012, 10:16 PM
guess I'm the only person here who like K.G :laugh2:

Hawkeye15
05-17-2012, 10:22 PM
I wish it was still on YouTube but back in his Raptor's days, it shows KG backing away from Bonner... Classic :laugh2:

Well, in KG's defense, Bonner is clearly over 6'2". KG doesn't deal with any bigger in an altercation.

Catfish1314
05-17-2012, 10:22 PM
You are remembering that season correctly but you have to realize that is one series out of almost a decade of disappointing season finishes. Ripped from the Book of Basketball:

"The T-Wolves got knocked out of the first round in Garnett's first seven Playoffs appearances. In nine elimination games over that stretch (Minny won two of them), Garnett averaged 18-11-6 and shot 40 percent. In his only Game 5 ('98 against Seattle), KG practically crapped himself with 7 points, 4 rebounds, and 10 TOs. Things turned during his MVP season in 2004, when Garnett had a certified monster Game 7 (a 32-21 against the Kings) before Cassell got injured and they fell to the Lakers. Then the Spree/Cassell dynamic imploded, Minnesota made all the wrong moves to replace them (Ricky Davis and Marko Jaric, anyone?) and Garnett became the only top forty Pyramid guy to miss the playoffs for three straight years."

I thought he was awesome in that postseason; not just against the Kings. But I probably followed that postseason closer than any other in the decade, with the possible exception of the 2002 playoffs.

The bold is frightening though. I don't remember that.

javsvt
05-17-2012, 10:27 PM
I used to hate Duncan, but I like him now that he hates KG.

Weezy
05-17-2012, 10:27 PM
Tim Duncan has one significant advantage over KG. He gets BETTER in the playoffs.

Regular Season PER:
Duncan - 24.7
Garnett - 23.3

Playoffs PER:
Duncan - 25.4
Garnett - 22.0

Regular Season Stats:
Duncan - 20.3ppg/11.3rpg/3.1apg/2.2bpg shooting splits 51/18/69 with TS% 55
Garnett - 19.3ppg/10.6rpg/4.0apg/1.5bpg shooting splits 50/28/79 with TS% 55

Playoffs Stats:
Duncan - 22.5ppg/12.3rpg/3.4apg/2.6bpg shooting splits 50/16/68 with TS% 56
Garnett - 19.7ppg/11.1rpg/3.7apg/1.4bpg shooting splits 48/31/79 with TS% 52.5

Duncan comes up big in the playoffs and KG has been known as a choke artist his whole career until he came to Boston. Hell he even had some disasterous games on the way to their 1 title until saving his reputation with a great Game 7. There's nothing about KG's first 10 seasons that makes me believe he could have carried a team to 4 titles the way Duncan did.

Nice post kob :up:

NYMetros
05-17-2012, 10:31 PM
2 of the best ever at their position, obviously there's gonna be a rivalry there.

Swashcuff
05-17-2012, 10:34 PM
Tim Duncan has one significant advantage over KG. He gets BETTER in the playoffs.

Regular Season PER:
Duncan - 24.7
Garnett - 23.3

Playoffs PER:
Duncan - 25.4
Garnett - 22.0

Regular Season Stats:
Duncan - 20.3ppg/11.3rpg/3.1apg/2.2bpg shooting splits 51/18/69 with TS% 55
Garnett - 19.3ppg/10.6rpg/4.0apg/1.5bpg shooting splits 50/28/79 with TS% 55

Playoffs Stats:
Duncan - 22.5ppg/12.3rpg/3.4apg/2.6bpg shooting splits 50/16/68 with TS% 56
Garnett - 19.7ppg/11.1rpg/3.7apg/1.4bpg shooting splits 48/31/79 with TS% 52.5

Duncan comes up big in the playoffs and KG has been known as a choke artist his whole career until he came to Boston. Hell he even had some disasterous games on the way to their 1 title until saving his reputation with a great Game 7. There's nothing about KG's first 10 seasons that makes me believe he could have carried a team to 4 titles the way Duncan did.

When comparing Duncan and KG in the post season we should not ignore their opponents production. KG has outproduced every PF he's ever match up against in the post season. His D has been that great.

KG is far from a choke artist in the post season.

KnicksorBust
05-17-2012, 10:52 PM
When comparing Duncan and KG in the post season we should not ignore their opponents production. KG has outproduced every PF he's ever match up against in the post season. His D has been that great.

KG is far from a choke artist in the post season.

Declining regular season to playoffs raw stats, significantly more ineffecient scoring, and 7 straight first round exits aren't enough for him to get that label? Aren't you generous?

He's clearly played his way out of that label but that doesn't abolish that those seasons were happening simultanously to Duncan winning 2 league MVPs and 2 Finals MVPs.

Hellcrooner
05-17-2012, 11:04 PM
wheres the surprise.

I mean, probably every Pf out there hates kg.

I know for sure Karl Malone hated him and Pau Hates him too.

kozelkid
05-17-2012, 11:04 PM
And this goes deeper than on the court I think

Years ago-

Supposedly, KG came up to Tim during the game on Mother's Day and wished him a happy mother's day. Most folks know Tim's mom died when he was 14.

For the record, that game (Game 1) was on May 9, 1999, which just happened to be Mother's Day, 1999 leading to a pretty good supposition that if Garnett was ever going to wish Timmy a Happy Mother's Day, it was that day. (curiously, the T'Wolves were almost always out of the playoffs by Mother's Day in other years and when they were in at that juncture (2004), they were playing the Kings and not the Spurs).

That's the game it supposedly happened. Supposedly, when Duncan was shooting free throws, Garnett said, "Happy Mother's Day, mother ****er."

Also this sweet quote from Artest-

Artest explained: "I remember one time Kevin Garnett was mushing him, and shoving him in the face; and Tim Duncan didn't do anything, he didn't react. He just kicked Kevin Garnett's a--, and won the damn championship. You know what I'm sayin'? That's gangsta. Everybody can show emotion, dunk on somebody, scream and be real cocky; but Tim Duncan is a ... he's a pimp."
__________________

New sig.

northsider
05-17-2012, 11:05 PM
It is a bad *** match up though.

Kashmir13579
05-17-2012, 11:07 PM
:laugh2:

Everyone outside of Twolves and Celtics fans hates KG.. He tries to injury other players on the reg. I have no respect for him. Paulie P and crew are alright in my book, but not KG.

Kashmir13579
05-17-2012, 11:11 PM
Well, in KG's defense, Bonner is clearly over 6'2". KG doesn't deal with any bigger in an altercation.



Baron Davis had him strung up by his jersey this year! Bill Walker would've merked him anyway..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NXSfZnoXBx8

Swashcuff
05-17-2012, 11:14 PM
Declining regular season to playoffs raw stats, significantly more ineffecient scoring,

The very same could be said for all the Elite PFs that he matched up against.


and 7 straight first round exits aren't enough for him to get that label? Aren't you generous?

Something that can't of course be ignored. That Western Conference wasn't a walk in the park either however.

In 97 just his 2nd season in the league he matched up against the Rockets Hakeem, Clyde and Chuck I mean that was certainly a very very tall order.

In 98 he came up against the best team in the conference in the Supersonics lead by GP, Vin Baker (when he was good) and Detlef Schrempf.

In 99 he matched up against TD for the first time in the post season and well that Spurs team went on to win their first title en route to their dynasty. This match up was a 1 v 8 seed. Of course their supporting casts really helped (in KGs case hurt) their seeding.

In 00 he came up against the Sheed led upstart Jail Blazers team who finished 2nd in the conference.

In 01 again matched up against TD and the Spurs the best team in the regular season out West that year. Once again this was a 1 v 8 match up.

In 02 he got swept by a Dirk led Marvericks team that featured Steve Nash and Michael Finley. This was a tough one again but KG played quite well.

In 03 he went up against a team that fresh off their three peat and for the first time he actually had home court advantage. However that team still had Kobe and Shaq while KG played with Wally Szczerbiak as his 2nd best player and Troy Hudson came up big that post season. This season however was Duncan's most impressive of all his title runs IMO.

Over that 7 year period KG played alongside 2 All Stars Tom Gugliotta and Wally Szcerbiak. In each and everyone of those series the Wolves were huge underdogs with KG being there only real threat on both ends of the floor.

Though KGs #s don't reflect very well on a whole he has had great post seasons series (most recognizably against the 03 Lakers) but the fact that he was virtually on his own so much for so long it hurt him in so many different ways. If you take into consideration the calibre of teams that KG had to play against and really analyze and break down each and every one of those series you wouldn't even see the need to make mention of the fact that he didn't get out of the first round for so long.

Do I think I'm being generous? NOOOO.


He's clearly played his way out of that label but that doesn't abolish that those seasons were happening simultanously to Duncan winning 2 league MVPs and 2 Finals MVPs.

Duncan also playing with other HOFers/All Stars and a HOF coach to groom him and his team into they winners they became. What did KG have?

Swashcuff
05-17-2012, 11:19 PM
I really am tempted to go even deeper into Kevin Garnett post season play but that post would be extremely long and I really don't know if I have the time for that right now. Garnett is one of the most misunderstood superstars to ever play the game and its a damn shame that he's labeled by some as a post season choker because of the dip in his offensive metrics relative to the regular seasons and the fact that he took so long to get out of the first round.

I'm certain that if I actually take the time to make that post most who considered KG a "choker" or an under performer would be singing a different tune.

Oh and by the way even though I am a Philadelphia 76ers fan (and KG currently plays for the Celts) I love Kevin Garnett. He's a douche/coward in every sense of the word on the basketball court but being like that has worked to his benefit his entire career and that's what I admire about him. He has gotten worse since he became a member of the Celts but if you think KGs ways aren't part of why he's such a great player then you're sadly mistaken.

LA_Raiders
05-17-2012, 11:24 PM
+1

Drewlius
05-17-2012, 11:31 PM
Cite your proof, otherwise its just opinion.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/h2h_finder.cgi?request=1&p1=garneke01&p2=duncati01#stats

Awaiting your proof as well clown. Anyone who understands why Duncan is the greatest PF of all time, realizes that stats have very little to do with his(Or his team's) success. If Duncan was a stat hound, he would have insane numbers, instead he is selfless, and wins basketball games(With the highest winning percentage of his era easily, I think he's behind Manu & Tony but that is obv semantics). All he does is win. Period.

Drewlius
05-17-2012, 11:39 PM
Duncan also playing with other HOFers/All Stars and a HOF coach to groom him and his team into they winners they became. What did KG have?

rofl... Care to take a gander why those guys are now considered HOFers?

Hawkeye15
05-17-2012, 11:41 PM
I really am tempted to go even deeper into Kevin Garnett post season play but that post would be extremely long and I really don't know if I have the time for that right now. Garnett is one of the most misunderstood superstars to ever play the game and its a damn shame that he's labeled by some as a post season choker because of the dip in his offensive metrics relative to the regular seasons and the fact that he took so long to get out of the first round.

I'm certain that if I actually take the time to make that post most who considered KG a "choker" or an under performer would be singing a different tune.

Oh and by the way even though I am a Philadelphia 76ers fan (and KG currently plays for the Celts) I love Kevin Garnett. He's a douche/coward in every sense of the word on the basketball court but being like that has worked to his benefit his entire career and that's what I admire about him. He has gotten worse since he became a member of the Celts but if you think KGs ways aren't part of why he's such a great player then you're sadly mistaken.


Don't bother. Already posted all, or most of what you will spend time looking up and watching. He is one of the top 15 players ever, but will never be ranked where he deserves to be.

Hawkeye15
05-17-2012, 11:42 PM
rofl... Care to take a gander why those guys are now considered HOFers?

Because David Robinson, Manu Ginoboli, and Tony Parker are 3 of the greats all time, and Popovich has a claim to being a top 3 coach ever?

Swashcuff
05-17-2012, 11:44 PM
rofl... Care to take a gander why those guys are now considered HOFers?

David Robinson? I think he is a good C not too sure though.

Manu Ginobili? He'd be a HOF calibre player anywhere he goes and Tony Parker has proven this season that he can (possibly could have been if given the opportunity) to be a top 5 PG in the NBA. Is that enough to make him HOF worthy? No but his international career would have put him into the discussion.

Let's pretend for a second however that TD had KG's cast and coaching for all those years. Which one of TDs supporting cast members would he have made HOF worthy?

Drewlius
05-18-2012, 12:01 AM
David Robinson? I think he is a good C not too sure though.

Manu Ginobili? He'd be a HOF calibre player anywhere he goes and Tony Parker has proven this season that he can (possibly could have been if given the opportunity) to be a top 5 PG in the NBA. Is that enough to make him HOF worthy? No but his international career would have put him into the discussion.

Let's pretend for a second however that TD had KG's cast and coaching for all those years. Which one of TDs supporting cast members would he have made HOF worthy?

The only one you get is Robinson. Parker/Manu/Pop, sorry, their HOF careers don't work without Duncan, and sure as hell don't work with Garnett in his place. KG is not even in the same realm as Duncan when it comes to the intangibles that create a winning environment. But I will just chalk it up to ignorance, because you clearly have not seen this club evolve around his character since inception.

tc2deuce
05-18-2012, 12:26 AM
(I like them both but more of a Duncan fan) Duncan is and will go down as the best PF ever. Should we fault him for being groomed properly...NO! The argument that KG would have had the same success or more if he was with SA is absurd. That is like saying Ryan Leaf would be a top 5 QB if he was drafted by the Colts. 4 rings to 1, 3 NBA Finals MVP 2 NBA MVP to 1, 9 All-NBA first team to 4..on top of what the stats say when they play each other. IMO I believe these two are 1 and 2 best PFs of all-time.
This coming from a Celtics fan

popo85
05-18-2012, 12:55 AM
One's a class act others a class douche.

ChaseHamels
05-18-2012, 01:59 AM
TD>KG at basketball and life.

bigsams50
05-18-2012, 02:04 AM
(I like them both but more of a Duncan fan) Duncan is and will go down as the best PF ever. Should we fault him for being groomed properly...NO! The argument that KG would have had the same success or more if he was with SA is absurd. That is like saying Ryan Leaf would be a top 5 QB if he was drafted by the Colts. 4 rings to 1, 3 NBA Finals MVP 2 NBA MVP to 1, 9 All-NBA first team to 4..on top of what the stats say when they play each other. IMO I believe these two are 1 and 2 best PFs of all-time.
This coming from a Celtics fan

The bolded statement makes no sense. Leaf was a bust, KG is one of the best PF's of all time. :confused:

bigsams50
05-18-2012, 02:05 AM
I like how people are overlooking that KG played with guys like Szcerbiak and Troy Hudson in Minny, while TD had The Admiral, Manu and Parker.

Iron24th
05-18-2012, 02:18 AM
Everyone likes duncan and hates garnett,this is comon sense.

Patman
05-18-2012, 02:35 AM
Because David Robinson, Manu Ginoboli, and Tony Parker are 3 of the greats all time, and Popovich has a claim to being a top 3 coach ever?


Yeah Duncan had some great help along the way, like nearly all the Greats that won Rings. But i honestly think that 2003 Squad gets overrated. The Admiral played 23.4 Minutes per Game in the playoffs, TP in his 2nd year wasn't nearly the player he would become. Manu was a rookie and still adjusted to the NBA game. Sorry that team gets overrated, the 2 best scorers outside of Duncan in those Playoffs, Tony and captain Jack managed a ORTG of 96. That Team wasn't bad don't get me wrong but people act like he had 3 Players that produced on a HOF level that year.

Maybe Garnett would have won as many titles with the spurs, maybe he would have clashed to hard with Pop and the F.O. . We don't know.

NYMetropolitans
05-18-2012, 02:49 AM
In the article..."You’ve made us suffer through the first two games of Indiana Boston" huh?

Also KG is a *****.

mynameismo
05-18-2012, 03:02 AM
I like how people are overlooking that KG played with guys like Szcerbiak and Troy Hudson in Minny, while TD had The Admiral, Manu and Parker.

The biggest difference to me was Coach Pop. One of the best if not the best coach out there.

KG never had that in MIN.

At the end of the day TD will always be regarded better than KG because of his Rings and class act reputation.

UnWantedTheory
05-18-2012, 04:15 AM
Yeah Duncan had some great help along the way, like nearly all the Greats that won Rings. But i honestly think that 2003 Squad gets overrated. The Admiral played 23.4 Minutes per Game in the playoffs, TP in his 2nd year wasn't nearly the player he would become. Manu was a rookie and still adjusted to the NBA game. Sorry that team gets overrated, the 2 best scorers outside of Duncan in those Playoffs, Tony and captain Jack managed a ORTG of 96. That Team wasn't bad don't get me wrong but people act like he had 3 Players that produced on a HOF level that year.

Maybe Garnett would have won as many titles with the spurs, maybe he would have clashed to hard with Pop and the F.O. . We don't know.

Good post. People tend to forget that TD'a rookie season DRob was already 32 & coming off a major injury. I believe he had one more 20 ppg season that year but he had declined. He was a 37 y/o shell of himself in 03 when the Spurs won the chip. Not to mention TP was in his second year and NOWHERE near the quality player he is just now getting respect for & it was Gino's rookie season. By that time TD was an established All-Star that won a championship with an out of his prime DRob. Anyone want's to argue from 05 on? Sure I can hear that. I know Garnett didn't have as good a situation or supporting cast, but to say TD started & was always surrounded with greatness is false. He helped make some of the names being thrown around more so than the reverse. Apparently TP and GINO became HOF'ers recently because I remember alot of people trying to debate otherwise not too long ago. In their 21 collective years in the NBA those 2 have a whopping 6 all-star appearances. I honestly don't think TP is a HOF'er and Gino would get in on his Euro career much more than his NBA career. It's not the stats or rings TD has that puts him above Garnett. It is literally everything else. Intangibles, leadership, character, etc. Success breeds success. It was so much easier to build around a known commodity talent & character wise such as TD. Perhaps KG should have taken less $ or had a better attitude, IDK? At the end of the day this is all conjecture & their legacies are pretty much etched in stone....beginning with "Tim Duncan".

JayW_1023
05-18-2012, 04:56 AM
I'm so pissed this is getting out. Tim Duncan doesn't need to be involved in some silly media spat right now. Leave him alone.

ESaady
05-18-2012, 05:20 AM
Gotta love Timmy. As a Warriors fan, Duncan was always the player I wish I had on my team.

Ebbs
05-18-2012, 05:44 AM
Does anyone not hate KG outside of Boston?

meloman1592
05-18-2012, 05:46 AM
They'll meet in the finals

69centers
05-18-2012, 06:37 AM
wheres the surprise.

I mean, probably every Pf out there hates kg.

I know for sure Karl Malone hated him and Pau Hates him too.

And every center, too, considering TD is really a center.

bagwell368
05-18-2012, 06:42 AM
I am the coach from Dazed and Confused.

In all seriousness, KG isn't a fighter. That much is obvious.

Kermit Washington is the only big guy I ever saw that could throw a proper punch...

KG is an instigator. He gets under people's skin, and while they get all worked up to get back at him, he's winning the match-up.

There is a long history of guys like that. Look at Laimbeer - big tough guy - until Parish tossed him to the floor, then all of a sudden Laimbeer didn't want any. KG, Laimbeer, Phil Jackson, lots of guys - you hate them when they are on the other team, and love them when they are on yours. KG might be a punk, but he's still a top 15 player all time, and AFAIK, he played on more bad teams then other members of that club.

I might be tempted to take Duncan over KG overall - I usually do for my all time starting 5, but, you guys are letting your personal dislike for KG color your opinion like it's a slam dunk, and it's not.

bagwell368
05-18-2012, 06:45 AM
Declining regular season to playoffs raw stats, significantly more ineffecient scoring, and 7 straight first round exits aren't enough for him to get that label? Aren't you generous?

No, he merely has a handle on judging someone on generally inferior teams. In the regular season hardly anyone plays D or with intensity. In the playoffs when they are drawing up the TWolves that coach says - stop KG and you win the game. Sad that fanatics can't see the truth.

bagwell368
05-18-2012, 06:49 AM
(I like them both but more of a Duncan fan) Duncan is and will go down as the best PF ever. Should we fault him for being groomed properly...NO! The argument that KG would have had the same success or more if he was with SA is absurd. That is like saying Ryan Leaf would be a top 5 QB if he was drafted by the Colts. 4 rings to 1, 3 NBA Finals MVP 2 NBA MVP to 1, 9 All-NBA first team to 4..on top of what the stats say when they play each other. IMO I believe these two are 1 and 2 best PFs of all-time.
This coming from a Celtics fan

Leaf is now being compared to KG. Even for you this is ridiculous.

Swashcuff
05-18-2012, 07:59 AM
The only one you get is Robinson. Parker/Manu/Pop, sorry, their HOF careers don't work without Duncan, and sure as hell don't work with Garnett in his place. KG is not even in the same realm as Duncan when it comes to the intangibles that create a winning environment. But I will just chalk it up to ignorance, because you clearly have not seen this club evolve around his character since inception.

Why didn't you answer my question? I dare you to answer the last question. Who on KGs Wolves teams would Tim Duncan have turn into a HOFer?

I'd argue I have a greater understanding and appreciation for Tim Duncan and those Spurs than you would ever have. I can assure you I am not ignorant to this topic in the very least. You are the one who is acting ignorant by saying that KG is not in the same realm as TD when in their respective prime there were seasons in which KG was better than TD.

You say TD's intangibles create a winning environment well back that up. Let's hear how TD has single handily turn Manu, Parker and Pop into HOF candidates and KG wouldn't.

bigsams50
05-18-2012, 08:00 AM
The biggest difference to me was Coach Pop. One of the best if not the best coach out there.

KG never had that in MIN.

At the end of the day TD will always be regarded better than KG because of his Rings and class act reputation.

I agree. Pop is a great HC, while KG had guys like Saunders and McHale

Swashcuff
05-18-2012, 08:02 AM
No, he merely has a handle on judging someone on generally inferior teams. In the regular season hardly anyone plays D or with intensity. In the playoffs when they are drawing up the TWolves that coach says - stop KG and you win the game. Sad that fanatics can't see the truth.

Ladies and Gentlemen this is the post of a man who clearly knows what he's talking about.

jericho
05-18-2012, 08:06 AM
Off of this, your mind is made up to suit your preference. Opinion yes - objectivity - doubtful.

that is his opinion and these is yours just because you say it doesnt mean your rite :p

Gram
05-18-2012, 08:09 AM
I hate Garnett too. :shrug:

Swashcuff
05-18-2012, 08:23 AM
Yeah Duncan had some great help along the way, like nearly all the Greats that won Rings. But i honestly think that 2003 Squad gets overrated. The Admiral played 23.4 Minutes per Game in the playoffs, TP in his 2nd year wasn't nearly the player he would become. Manu was a rookie and still adjusted to the NBA game. Sorry that team gets overrated, the 2 best scorers outside of Duncan in those Playoffs, Tony and captain Jack managed a ORTG of 96. That Team wasn't bad don't get me wrong but people act like he had 3 Players that produced on a HOF level that year.

Maybe Garnett would have won as many titles with the spurs, maybe he would have clashed to hard with Pop and the F.O. . We don't know.

This I can agree with but even that 03 Squad was better than anything KG had pre 04 in Minny. Also when you consider the fact that that team developed a winning culture/formula already and was again coached by Coach Pop (who was in those days extremely under appreciated) you can understand why the Spurs were really good.

As for the 2nd part I think KG winning as much would be more logical than say he clashing with Pop and the F.O. I mean what reason would he have. He didn't even clash in Minny and he was losing so much for all those years without any help.

jericho
05-18-2012, 08:41 AM
And every center, too, considering TD is really a center.

when did you started watching bball td has always been a pf untill recently they moved him to the 5 cuz he aint as fast as he used to be

bagwell368
05-18-2012, 09:09 AM
Awaiting your proof as well clown. Anyone who understands why Duncan is the greatest PF of all time, realizes that stats have very little to do with his(Or his team's) success. If Duncan was a stat hound, he would have insane numbers, instead he is selfless, and wins basketball games(With the highest winning percentage of his era easily, I think he's behind Manu & Tony but that is obv semantics). All he does is win. Period.

If Duncan is selfless why does he have less APG then KG?

Winning percentage as any serious and unbiased fan knows is a product of a team. Seriously comparing KG and Duncan in that way w/o adjusting for the teammates and coaching is revealing one thing, the smoldering bias of a fanatic.

#1. You assume that KG's play would be the same as it was on Minny/Boston. For instance KG is a better passer then Duncan, with better teammates instead of beating him by the APG that he did, it might have been more, perhaps a lot more. You can't account for that - just your bias (or fervent desire for Duncan to win this face off to prove your beliefs correct) can claim he'd be the same.

#2. Lets play your game anyhow for the moment. Totally.

First thing is KG was in the league for two years before Duncan. In 1995-1996, SA was 59-23 with a SRS of +5.98. I assert that team wins the title with the very young KG on the team.

In 2003-2004, KG was the MVP and had a better year then Duncan. The Spurs didn't win.. they lost in the Semi's. #1 SRS in the league at a huge 7.51. Maybe a better player on the team then Duncan could have stopped the Lakers.

Again in 2005-2006, KG played much better then Duncan (+3.7 WS) and SA (63-19) failed to win the title (#1 SRS again). SA lost in the semis w/ the 2nd best record in the league? What a failure <cough> choke Timmy was that year. I mean come on! they lost to the Mavs with that roster?

In 2007-2008, KG played better (~2 WS) then Duncan again. I assert w/o KG the Celts go no place and SA (56-26) wins the title.

In 2010-2011 KG was again better then Duncan, SA went out in the 1st round with a 61 win season.... Hmmm, another big choke by Duncan and co. Grizz 4-2 over a 61 win team......

I assert in at least two of the above mentioned seasons each players stats/play being just what it was, SA wins two MORE titles, perhaps a third. As long as it nets as many or more Titles your argument is kaput. I'm quite sure that my arguments are more cohesive and correct then yours. By all means, try and critique them.

BTW, does anybody think Popovich would have gotten more out of KG then Flip friggin' Saunders? Too bad, every person in this thread should know that answer.

But why think? Thinking is hard.... Just hate KG, that's easy.

Clown indeed.

jericho
05-18-2012, 09:16 AM
i remember kg back in minny he did everything he could do anything on the floor and he was 1 of the better passing big men in the league that being said
szczerbiak was really good back then
tom gugliotta was good 2
terrell brandon was a beast
laphonso ellis was decent
chancey billups you guys had him and traded him
then in 04 you guys added
spree and cassel
oh and by the way manu and parker arent hall of famers they could get there but they arent guranteed the only 1s you can say are hall of famers that were around duncan are robinson and pops thats bout it

kdspurman
05-18-2012, 09:30 AM
If Duncan is selfless why does he have less APG then KG?

Winning percentage as any serious and unbiased fan knows is a product of a team. Seriously comparing KG and Duncan in that way w/o adjusting for the teammates and coaching is revealing one thing, the smoldering bias of a fanatic.

#1. You assume that KG's play would be the same as it was on Minny/Boston. For instance KG is a better passer then Duncan, with better teammates instead of beating him by the APG that he did, it might have been more, perhaps a lot more. You can't account for that - just your bias (or fervent desire for Duncan to win this face off to prove your beliefs correct) can claim he'd be the same.

#2. Lets play your game anyhow for the moment. Totally.

First thing is KG was in the league for two years before Duncan. In 1995-1996, SA was 59-23 with a SRS of +5.98. I assert that team wins the title with the very young KG on the team.

In 2003-2004, KG was the MVP and had a better year then Duncan. The Spurs didn't win.. they lost in the Semi's. #1 SRS in the league at a huge 7.51. Maybe a better player on the team then Duncan could have stopped the Lakers.

Again in 2005-2006, KG played much better then Duncan (+3.7 WS) and SA (63-19) failed to win the title (#1 SRS again). SA lost in the semis w/ the 2nd best record in the league? What a failure <cough> choke Timmy was that year. I mean come on! they lost to the Mavs with that roster?

In 2007-2008, KG played better (~2 WS) then Duncan again. I assert w/o KG the Celts go no place and SA (56-26) wins the title.

In 2010-2011 KG was again better then Duncan, SA went out in the 1st round with a 61 win season.... Hmmm, another big choke by Duncan and co. Grizz 4-2 over a 61 win team...... (12.7/10.5) wow wonderful effort.

I assert in at least two of the above mentioned seasons each players stats/play being just what it was, SA wins two MORE titles, perhaps a third.

BTW, does anybody think Popovich would have gotten more out of KG then Flip friggin' Saunders?

But why think? Thinking is hard.... Just hate KG, that's easy.

Clown indeed.


I know this is not my argument, but some of the stuff you're saying is so off I feel obligated to reply:

That's a pathetic way to say Duncan isn't selfless. I mean truly, pathetic :facepalm: He passes out of double teams, and it's often his pass that leads to the assist/open shot. He is selfless in that he doesn't care if he's not the focal point anymore, and is willing to put his ego aside for the betterment of the team. He's ALWAYS been that way. He doesn't take credit, he always puts his teammates firsts and does not care about the glory of being a superstar.

Some of your "opinions" are way off based. Had it not been for .4 which, we're talking a whole different outcome potentially. Timmy was still putting up +20/+12 a game in that series vs the Lakers, who the year prior had absolutely went off on them. Yea KG won the MVP that year, and if he was on the Spurs, no way that doesn't fuel Shaq and the Lakers even more. Too many intangibles and differences for you to ASSUME KG would have made them a championship team.

And seriously, Duncan was not even healthy last year. And he hasn't been in a few years. This year he finally is, losing weight, taking care of his body, thus putting less pressure on his knee. (And wonderful effort huh? I guess KG's whopping 14.9/10.0 average is light years ahead of 12.7/10.5 smh...)

Absolute JOKE to think they win 2-3 MORE titles with KG. Just cause he had a better individual year? I guess that means in 97-98 Timmy would've taken Minny further than right? Or in 01-02 when Minny was swept by Dallas, if Tim was there they would've done better cause he had the superior numbers. See how that works both ways? It's complete garbage to be quite honest.

And if you're telling me a superstar who you're proclaiming the best PF of all time needs a great coach to get the best out of him? That's also a joke. The best players play their best and do what they do regardless who the coach is. ESPECIALLY in their prime. You think if Jordan was with another coach other than Phil in his prime he wouldn't maximize his potential?

Hawkeye15
05-18-2012, 09:34 AM
Yeah Duncan had some great help along the way, like nearly all the Greats that won Rings. But i honestly think that 2003 Squad gets overrated. The Admiral played 23.4 Minutes per Game in the playoffs, TP in his 2nd year wasn't nearly the player he would become. Manu was a rookie and still adjusted to the NBA game. Sorry that team gets overrated, the 2 best scorers outside of Duncan in those Playoffs, Tony and captain Jack managed a ORTG of 96. That Team wasn't bad don't get me wrong but people act like he had 3 Players that produced on a HOF level that year.

Maybe Garnett would have won as many titles with the spurs, maybe he would have clashed to hard with Pop and the F.O. . We don't know.

agree with all of this.

StinkEye
05-18-2012, 09:56 AM
KG yelled at my little brother.

Patman
05-18-2012, 10:16 AM
As for the 2nd part I think KG winning as much would be more logical than say he clashing with Pop and the F.O. I mean what reason would he have. He didn't even clash in Minny and he was losing so much for all those years without any help.

POP is a very demanding Coach, he gets on Duncan brutally during Practice and Games. I'm not sure a young KG would have taken this verbal abuse. This is what allowed POP to get hard on the role players, because his superstar would just take it.

Again this is all speculation and it could have gone either way and without the full knowledge of all the factors it's just a never ending what if game.

The Duncan selfish stuff i won't even comment just unnecessary.

AIRMAR72
05-18-2012, 10:20 AM
THIS is ancient news all started when both guys were younger too much to type to go into the true detail that fuel this subject BUT GARNETT own timmy on the courts

Swashcuff
05-18-2012, 10:24 AM
POP is a very demanding Coach, he gets on Duncan brutally during Practice and Games. I'm not sure a young KG would have taken this verbal abuse. This is what allowed POP to get hard on the role players, because his superstar would just take it.

Again this is all speculation and it could have gone either way and without the full knowledge of all the factors it's just a never ending what if game.

The Duncan selfish stuff i won't even comment just unnecessary.

People would have said the very same about Allen Iverson and Larry Brown but in the end they both love and appreciate one another despite their differences.

Patman
05-18-2012, 10:35 AM
People would have said the very same about Allen Iverson and Larry Brown but in the end they both love and appreciate one another despite their differences.

Look like I said this is a guessing game that can go either way and no one can claim he's correct.

For me personally I will take Duncan over KG every time. Duncan was/is just the bigger Inside presence on both ends of the floor.

Kashmir13579
05-18-2012, 10:40 AM
KGs peak years are better but you'd be driving a hard bargain if you asked me to believe KG was or will be remembered as a better player than Duncan.

KnicksorBust
05-18-2012, 10:42 AM
The very same could be said for all the Elite PFs that he matched up against.


Something that can't of course be ignored. That Western Conference wasn't a walk in the park either however.

In 97 just his 2nd season in the league he matched up against the Rockets Hakeem, Clyde and Chuck I mean that was certainly a very very tall order.

In 98 he came up against the best team in the conference in the Supersonics lead by GP, Vin Baker (when he was good) and Detlef Schrempf.

In 99 he matched up against TD for the first time in the post season and well that Spurs team went on to win their first title en route to their dynasty. This match up was a 1 v 8 seed. Of course their supporting casts really helped (in KGs case hurt) their seeding.

In 00 he came up against the Sheed led upstart Jail Blazers team who finished 2nd in the conference.

In 01 again matched up against TD and the Spurs the best team in the regular season out West that year. Once again this was a 1 v 8 match up.

In 02 he got swept by a Dirk led Marvericks team that featured Steve Nash and Michael Finley. This was a tough one again but KG played quite well.

In 03 he went up against a team that fresh off their three peat and for the first time he actually had home court advantage. However that team still had Kobe and Shaq while KG played with Wally Szczerbiak as his 2nd best player and Troy Hudson came up big that post season. This season however was Duncan's most impressive of all his title runs IMO.

Over that 7 year period KG played alongside 2 All Stars Tom Gugliotta and Wally Szcerbiak. In each and everyone of those series the Wolves were huge underdogs with KG being there only real threat on both ends of the floor.

Though KGs #s don't reflect very well on a whole he has had great post seasons series (most recognizably against the 03 Lakers) but the fact that he was virtually on his own so much for so long it hurt him in so many different ways. If you take into consideration the calibre of teams that KG had to play against and really analyze and break down each and every one of those series you wouldn't even see the need to make mention of the fact that he didn't get out of the first round for so long.

Do I think I'm being generous? NOOOO.



Duncan also playing with other HOFers/All Stars and a HOF coach to groom him and his team into they winners they became. What did KG have?

"Over that 7 year period KG played alongside 2 All Stars Tom Gugliotta and Wally Szcerbiak." Not too mention he got to play with two talented PGs in Stephon Marbury and Terrell Brandon. That's not enough talent to win one series? You talk as if being the underdog allows him to lose every series and be beyond reproach. I don't see it the same way. His dip in production is extremely relevant considering he was his team's #1 option.

Look, I've never said he should have won a title with Minnesota. I've never said Duncan would have won a title with those teams. All I'm saying his reputation for choking was well-deserved. The start of his post-season career was an overwhelming disappointment.


Yeah Duncan had some great help along the way, like nearly all the Greats that won Rings. But i honestly think that 2003 Squad gets overrated. The Admiral played 23.4 Minutes per Game in the playoffs, TP in his 2nd year wasn't nearly the player he would become. Manu was a rookie and still adjusted to the NBA game. Sorry that team gets overrated, the 2 best scorers outside of Duncan in those Playoffs, Tony and captain Jack managed a ORTG of 96. That Team wasn't bad don't get me wrong but people act like he had 3 Players that produced on a HOF level that year.

Maybe Garnett would have won as many titles with the spurs, maybe he would have clashed to hard with Pop and the F.O. . We don't know.

I think the 99 team is overrated as well. They were a 2 man team.

Jumi
05-18-2012, 10:48 AM
I like KG. He's the opposite of Duncan so when they play against each other it's like a Shakespeare play! I wished they'd played against each other more in the playoffs in their primes. I don't compare the two statistically because they do what it takes for their TEAM to be sucessful! For those who say KG owned Duncan or Duncan owned KG didn't watch the games that they played against each other. Duncan never owned Shaq and Shaq never owned Duncan, but the TEAM Shaq was on had great sucess against my Spurs. KG's TEAM didn't.

Jordan had 63 in the playoffs, but Bird's TEAM won! Winning is all that matters!!!

Swashcuff
05-18-2012, 10:53 AM
Look like I said this is a guessing game that can go either way and no one can claim he's correct.

For me personally I will take Duncan over KG every time. Duncan was/is just the bigger Inside presence on both ends of the floor.

Agreed. My whole point is that people are acting as if TD's support has not been beneficial to him and KG's support has not been a disadvantage when compared to TD.

bagwell368
05-18-2012, 10:56 AM
That's a pathetic way to say Duncan isn't selfless. I mean truly, pathetic

It's called rejection of assertion. If the poster has other points to make, then lets hear them.


He passes out of double teams, and it's often his pass that leads to the assist/open shot. He is selfless in that he doesn't care if he's not the focal point anymore, and is willing to put his ego aside for the betterment of the team. He's ALWAYS been that way. He doesn't take credit, he always puts his teammates firsts and does not care about the glory of being a superstar.

Interesting, I thought reading that you were talking about KG. I'd wager you've seen a lot less of KG on the Celts then Duncan in the same time frame on SA. So fan bias and infrequent viewing of a player you are predisposed to disliking - none of that is a bias because you are so fair minded, is that it? Beyond facepalm back at you.


Some of your "opinions" are way off based. Had it not been for .4 which, we're talking a whole different outcome potentially. Timmy was still putting up +20/+12 a game in that series vs the Lakers, who the year prior had absolutely went off on them. Yea KG won the MVP that year, and if he was on the Spurs, no way that doesn't fuel Shaq and the Lakers even more. Too many intangibles and differences for you to ASSUME KG would have made them a championship team.

Did you read what I wrote. I didn't say he'd bring them a title in every year I brought up - did I, in fact I said he wouldn't. All you have to prove is that whatever titles KG didn't win in place of TD is made up (or more then made up) by the other years in question. That was the attack against KG, on SA, he'd win less titles - and the examination (or was it an execution?) of those 4 years is what was proposed as "evidence". I'm fully prepared to believe KG might have won less then those titles in those 4 years, as long as posters here can consider w/ an open mind the other point - that in all the other years KG could/would win enough to replace the one(s) he didn't win.


And seriously, Duncan was not even healthy last year. And he hasn't been in a few years.

Please... in terms of core say 5 years - TD has KG beat. However it appears that KG is ahead, and appears set to remain ahead in career length and value. That's to his advantage. Why should that advantage be ceded? Because it makes your life easier? KG was hurt in '09-'09. I don't see you making excuses for him, and you notice I didn't either. It's tough, but it's life.


This year he finally is, losing weight, taking care of his body, thus putting less pressure on his knee.

Even worse, you want me to excuse a lazy athlete?


Absolute JOKE to think they win 2-3 MORE titles with KG.

Absolute joke for you or anyone else to say he'd win 1,2,3 less on SA. Turnabout w/ logic is fair play. You've just expressed an opinion - I'm not moved.


Just cause he had a better individual year? I guess that means in 97-98 Timmy would've taken Minny further than right? Or in 01-02 when Minny was swept by Dallas, if Tim was there they would've done better cause he had the superior numbers. See how that works both ways? It's complete garbage to be quite honest.

Go ahead and put Duncan on the TWolves and Celts, and argue the title count. As long as the door was opened to use KG's poor teams against him - even with him projected to SA? What I have done makes as much sense, and it's got more behind it because SA was in the playoffs every year, and Minny wasn't. Do you maybe get why that is important?


And if you're telling me a superstar who you're proclaiming the best PF of all time needs a great coach to get the best out of him? That's also a joke. The best players play their best and do what they do regardless who the coach is. ESPECIALLY in their prime. You think if Jordan was with another coach other than Phil in his prime he wouldn't maximize his potential?

Telling you? I am asking you what happens if the coaches are switched?

What if Wilt had Red for a Coach (Auerbach, not Holtzman).

Or my favorite - move Hakeem to the Bulls, and Jordan to the Rockets and give me the title count now? Oh cool, you brougt up Jordan yourself. What did Jordan do before he got his side kick and a real coach? Not win a title - isn't that so?

Joke? It's funny when people lead with an opinion and either don't know enough or are too wrapped up with the topic to turn on the brain - or at least be ojective. Just can't do it.

kdspurman
05-18-2012, 11:01 AM
It's called rejection of assertion. If the poster has other points to make, then lets hear them.



Interesting, I thought reading that you were talking about KG. I'd wager you've seen a lot less of KG on the Celts then Duncan in the same time frame on SA. So fan bias and infrequent viewing of a player you are predisposed to disliking - none of that is a bias because you are so fair minded, is that it? Beyond facepalm back at you.



Did you read what I wrote. I didn't say he'd bring them a title in every year I brought up - did I, in fact I said he wouldn't. All you have to prove is that whatever titles KG didn't win in place of TD is made up (or more then made up) by the other years in question. That was the attack against KG, on SA, he'd win less titles - and the examination (or was it an execution?) of those 4 years is what was proposed as "evidence". I'm fully prepared to believe KG might have won less then those titles in those 4 years, as long as posters here can consider w/ an open mind the other point - that in all the other years KG could/would win enough to replace the one(s) he didn't win.



Please... in terms of core say 5 years - TD has KG beat. However it appears that KG is ahead, and appears set to remain ahead in career length and value. That's to his advantage. Why should that advantage be ceded? Because it makes your life easier? KG was hurt in '09-'09. I don't see you making excuses for him, and you notice I didn't either. It's tough, but it's life.



Even worse, you want me to excuse a lazy athlete?



Absolute joke for you or anyone else to say he'd win 1,2,3 less on SA. Turnabout w/ logic is fair play. You've just expressed an opinion - I'm not moved.



Go ahead and put Duncan on the TWolves and Celts, and argue the title count. As long as the door was opened to use KG's poor teams against him - even with him projected to SA? What I have done makes as much sense, and it's got more behind it because SA was in the playoffs every year, and Minny wasn't. Do you maybe get why that is important?



Telling you? I am asking you what happens if the coaches are switched?

What if Wilt had Red for a Coach (Auerbach, not Holtzman).

Or my favorite - move Hakeem to the Bulls, and Jordan to the Rockets and give me the title count now? Oh cool, you brougt up Jordan yourself. What did Jordan do before he got his side kick and a real coach? Not win a title - isn't that so?

Joke? It's funny when people lead with an opinion and either don't know enough or are too wrapped up with the topic to turn on the brain - or at least be ojective. Just can't do it.

:laugh2: Now Timmy is Lazy??

Your likely a KG fan of 4 years, but I'm biased? The irony....

bagwell368
05-18-2012, 11:03 AM
The Duncan selfish stuff i won't even comment just unnecessary.

I didn't say that. I said there is at least one thing that disagrees - stat and eye test says KG passes more and is more of an incisive passer. If that's so - and please someone try and tip that point over - then it's at least one major "sharing" activity on the court that at the very least KG does not trail TD.

Maybe the problem is that KG has been wearing the bad guy hat and TD the good guy hat for so long you guys are actually spewing popular myths instead of observed facts and behavior.

Being a punk to get into the head of the other team is not selfish. It might be unsportsmanlike, annoying, etc. But it isn't selfish. Go ahead and roll the tape of the 2007-2008 Celts and do try and find the KG in decline playing out of his mind, and turning that entire team into a bunch of defensive stoppers - even Ray Allen, and he turned Perkins into a defensive force. What's Perk up to now? Not the same guy (even before the knee problems)...

You guys are infected with anti-KG antibodies. Like I said my 5 year peak NBA team has TD and not KG. But after this playoff run is over I think career wise KG might have swung TD into the rear view mirror and you guys won't even know because your minds are made up. /Cool

bagwell368
05-18-2012, 11:06 AM
:laugh2: Now Timmy is Lazy??

Your likely a KG fan of 4 years, but I'm biased? The irony....

You are the guy that said he had a weight problem.

In the real world not ruled by the Spurs. Weight problem == lazy.

The irony is that you seem to have no real answers for what I wrote.

I have things to do now, why don't you try and compose a post that doesn't have little snarks and facepalms all over it.

hugepatsfan
05-18-2012, 11:07 AM
It's my Opinion KG would not have dominated against the 03 Lakers like Timmy did. And lead that team to a title, while making his teammates better.

It's my Opinion KG would not have taken over game 7 in 05 against the Pistons. And lead the charge, and take the team on his back.

Why? Because Timmy's overall play excelled in the playoffs.

Can't ONLY look at #'s here, cause Tim's personality and leadership gained the trust of his teammates & coaching staff. People don't realize that personality, chemistry, and fitting the right personnel are vital to a team's success.

This post is so biased it's not even funny. And I agree with you that Duncan>KG. But to talk about Duncan's leadership like it's a decisive advantage over KG is rediculous. Look at what KG did when he came to BOS. He changed around an entire franchise. The entire mindset of BOS shifted when KG came here.

Tim Duncan got drafted by a team where he was mentored by David Robinson, one of the all time greats. He was coached by one of the all time great NBA coaches. KG went to the Minnesota ****ing T'Wolves.

Swashcuff
05-18-2012, 11:08 AM
"Over that 7 year period KG played alongside 2 All Stars Tom Gugliotta and Wally Szcerbiak." Not too mention he got to play with two talented PGs in Stephon Marbury and Terrell Brandon. That's not enough talent to win one series? You talk as if being the underdog allows him to lose every series and be beyond reproach. I don't see it the same way. His dip in production is extremely relevant considering he was his team's #1 option.

Why do you keep mentioning dip in production? Historically damn near every single star player in league history has a dip in production when the post season comes around and when you play on the teams that KG has played with that's not surprising to see that it would be the case with him. KG won every individual match up he's ever had in those post seasons. His team however did not and that's why he has been seen in your eyes as such a poor player.

Bagwell alluded to the reasoning earlier and its only logical in all honesty. I'm not talking as if the underdog allows him to lose every series but you are completely ignoring the fact that the other teams were just better. Better structured, better coached and had better casts surrounding their best players or in the Lakers case the best tandem of their time.


Look, I've never said he should have won a title with Minnesota. I've never said Duncan would have won a title with those teams. All I'm saying his reputation for choking was well-deserved. The start of his post-season career was an overwhelming disappointment.

This is a crazy trend of thought. An overwhelming disappointment? Really? :pity:

I honestly think you need to go back and analyze those series again.


I think the 99 team is overrated as well. They were a 2 man team.

So were the Lakers dynasty except the fact that the 99 Spurs team had wayyyy better support.

kdspurman
05-18-2012, 11:11 AM
This post is so biased it's not even funny. And I agree with you that Duncan>KG. But to talk about Duncan's leadership like it's a decisive advantage over KG is rediculous. Look at what KG did when he came to BOS. He changed around an entire franchise. The entire mindset of BOS shifted when KG came here.

Tim Duncan got drafted by a team where he was mentored by David Robinson, one of the all time greats. He was coached by one of the all time great NBA coaches. KG went to the Minnesota ****ing T'Wolves.

Why don't you look at your fellow Celtics fan and now KG fan of 5 years and tell me what's biased. Saying the Spurs would have 2-3 more titles with KG than TD?

That's my opinion, based off what I've seen from those guys in the playoffs

Swashcuff
05-18-2012, 11:11 AM
:laugh2: Now Timmy is Lazy??

Your likely a KG fan of 4 years, but I'm biased? The irony....

The man just spent all that time putting together such a post where he explained his POV to you and you take one thing out. :confused:

kdspurman
05-18-2012, 11:12 AM
You are the guy that said he had a weight problem.

In the real world not ruled by the Spurs. Weight problem == lazy.

The irony is that you seem to have no real answers for what I wrote.

I have things to do now, why don't you try and compose a post that doesn't have little snarks and facepalms all over it.

I said he had a weight problem?? Where? I said he lost weight to take some pressure on his knees. He didn't HAVE to but it's the reason he's still going strong today.

WHy even bother? You're a KG fan of 4-5 years and you're going to keep arguing your point. What's funny is if TD got drafted to Boston you'd be singing a different tune.

kdspurman
05-18-2012, 11:14 AM
The man just spent all that time putting together such a post where he explained his POV to you and you take one thing out. :confused:

Cause I just took the time to respond and he took part of what I said and turned into "Tim is lazy". Why don't you look at his responses too, just cause he responds to each of my paragraphs in an ever so detailed fashion, does not make his responses accurate or even valid.

I would be willing to bet this dude wasn't defending KG till he came to Boston. Now suddenly cause KG comes to Boston and gets 1 ring it triumphs what Tim has been doing his whole career in terms of stability, & consistency? Give me a break...

sep11ie
05-18-2012, 11:21 AM
Everyone hates KG

hugepatsfan
05-18-2012, 11:22 AM
Why don't you look at your fellow Celtics fan and now KG fan of 5 years and tell me what's biased. Saying the Spurs would have 2-3 more titles with KG than TD?

That's my opinion, based off what I've seen from those guys in the playoffs

You refuse to acknowledge anything about KG's game as being better than Duncan's. That's just not true. People aren't going to take you seriously if yu just have a blanket statement of "Duncan is better - the stats just don't show it" every time someone posts evidene that KG is better at something. And the way you just bring up intangibles as an argument for TD whenever you feel threatened is laughable. You just pull **** out of your *** that has no factual backing whatsoever. Like I said, I'm in the Duncan>KG camp, but if I watch you try to intelligently argue w/ Bags anymore I might have to change because he's killing you.

KnicksorBust
05-18-2012, 11:24 AM
No, he merely has a handle on judging someone on generally inferior teams. In the regular season hardly anyone plays D or with intensity. In the playoffs when they are drawing up the TWolves that coach says - stop KG and you win the game. Sad that fanatics can't see the truth.

I'll post my rebuttal to this later.

kdspurman
05-18-2012, 11:32 AM
You refuse to acknowledge anything about KG's game as being better than Duncan's. That's just not true. People aren't going to take you seriously if yu just have a blanket statement of "Duncan is better - the stats just don't show it" every time someone posts evidene that KG is better at something. And the way you just bring up intangibles as an argument for TD whenever you feel threatened is laughable. You just pull **** out of your *** that has no factual backing whatsoever. Like I said, I'm in the Duncan>KG camp, but if I watch you try to intelligently argue w/ Bags anymore I might have to change because he's killing you.

That's not true-

I believe KG is a better defender
I even believe KG is a better passer
And for the majority of their careers he was a better outside shooter

You look at all my posts I'm not simply putting "TD > KG" I'm not a big advanced stat guy and don't pretend to be. What I know is you can't simply rely on stats. Like I've been saying, personalities and chemistry play a huge role in the success Tim has had with the Spurs. His personality fits them to a T and their organization as a whole. Can you say that if KG was there he would have the same relationship with management, the players, and the coaching staff?

KG is a different kind of leader than TD. Very different, not better nor worse. Just different. So when folks say put KG in for TD and they are equally or more successful based on numbers, dam right I'm going to argue that because that's complete garbage to try and do that. There's so much more to the game than numbers and some of ya'll aren't getting that.

I personally don't like KG, the guy's just not really a good guy on the court and takes trash talking to a new level where it's down right disrespectful. Growing up a Spurs fan you grow to appreciate good sportsmanship, and respect for the game. Even as a Spurs fan, I know I'm not the only one who feels this way.

KG and TD to me are 1-2 and it always bothered me when people put Dirk ahead of him cause that's insane. Barkley was great as was Malone, but I think KG has much more versatility and impact on the overall team, however had he not went to Boston, I don't know this is the case.

Fact is, I don't just come out with random facts out my ***. I talk about things OTHER than numbers because numbers aren't everything. If you honestly think Bagwell is right cause he puts these numbers out and says KG > TD this year, so the Spurs would've won the title that year with KG instead of TD then that's your prerogative.

benzni
05-18-2012, 11:33 AM
Well said Duncan

jericho
05-18-2012, 11:49 AM
Why do you keep mentioning dip in production? Historically damn near every single star player in league history has a dip in production when the post season comes around and when you play on the teams that KG has played with that's not surprising to see that it would be the case with him. KG won every individual match up he's ever had in those post seasons. His team however did not and that's why he has been seen in your eyes as such a poor player.

Bagwell alluded to the reasoning earlier and its only logical in all honesty. I'm not talking as if the underdog allows him to lose every series but you are completely ignoring the fact that the other teams were just better. Better structured, better coached and had better casts surrounding their best players or in the Lakers case the best tandem of their time.



This is a crazy trend of thought. An overwhelming disappointment? Really? :pity:

I honestly think you need to go back and analyze those series again.



So were the Lakers dynasty except the fact that the 99 Spurs team had wayyyy better support.

not true at all tmacs numbers were better in the post season than the regular season and yet he gets bashed for being supposedly a choker when you are in the playoffs thats when you have to bring your a game so if you guys can bash tmac for getting better in the post season then we can bash kg for not performing as good as we all know could have done

JayW_1023
05-18-2012, 12:09 PM
I just ****ing (excuse my language) HATE the fact that the rest of the media MAGNIFIED a small excerpt in an otherwise great article and to create AMMO that isn't there.

Tim Duncan has always been about professionalism and taking care of business. Now it looks like some personal vendetta. It just makes me sick, because Duncan has more class than that, and he doesn't deserve this.

Keep his greatness intact, don't taint it with glossy media spats.

Ugh. I feel so dirty.

Heatcheck
05-18-2012, 12:13 PM
Cite your proof, otherwise its just opinion.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/h2h_finder.cgi?request=1&p1=garneke01&p2=duncati01#stats

even with proof its just opinion

Swashcuff
05-18-2012, 12:16 PM
not true at all tmacs numbers were better in the post season than the regular season and yet he gets bashed for being supposedly a choker when you are in the playoffs thats when you have to bring your a game so if you guys can bash tmac for getting better in the post season then we can bash kg for not performing as good as we all know could have done

Wow T-Mac :clap: one example. I didn't say every single one. I said it was near. There are far greater amounts of superstars that production has dipped in the post season as opposed to getting better or even stay on par. Only difference is however that KG on more instances than not wins the battle with his opposite # and not just that but holds his opposite # to some of the worst performances that they've had throughout their entire post season runs.

People who bash T-Mac and call him a choker in the post seasons knows nothing about basketball plain and simple.

JayW_1023
05-18-2012, 12:24 PM
Seriously, a lot of American sportsmedia blow everything out of proportion tenfold. Trying to instigate some sort of beef that isn't there. Horrible.

Duncan doesn't hate Garnett. He has a distaste for some of the things KG might've said or done in the past. It's a cold shoulder, not hatred.

This really contradicts what journalism is about. No nuances, just sound bytes. This is sensationalist, opportunistic pile of dung.

What's so awful about telling things they way they are. Sports Illustrated wrote an otherwise great background story on Duncan, and all the other media vultures seem fixated on this irrelevant tidbit.

JayW_1023
05-18-2012, 12:28 PM
As for who is better between Duncan and KG, they both have completely different qualities. It's just beautiful in basketball to see the same floor position potentially flourish in so many different skill sets.

They are both great as far as being future HOF basketball players.

tc2deuce
05-18-2012, 12:40 PM
The bolded statement makes no sense. Leaf was a bust, KG is one of the best PF's of all time. :confused:

How do you know of Leaf would have been a bust if he went to the colts?!... You don't! Which is my point

jericho
05-18-2012, 12:42 PM
Wow T-Mac :clap: one example. I didn't say every single one. I said it was near. There are far greater amounts of superstars that production has dipped in the post season as opposed to getting better or even stay on par. Only difference is however that KG on more instances than not wins the battle with his opposite # and not just that but holds his opposite # to some of the worst performances that they've had throughout their entire post season runs.

People who bash T-Mac and call him a choker in the post seasons knows nothing about basketball plain and simple.

we using kg as an example 2 give me another 1 superstar that his production went down in the post season same can go for ya :)

tc2deuce
05-18-2012, 12:44 PM
Leaf is now being compared to KG. Even for you this is ridiculous.

Just like your comment about KG being on the spurs would have had the same amount of success or more than TD..

Patman
05-18-2012, 12:44 PM
I didn't say that. I said there is at least one thing that disagrees - stat and eye test says KG passes more and is more of an incisive passer. If that's so - and please someone try and tip that point over - then it's at least one major "sharing" activity on the court that at the very least KG does not trail TD.

Maybe the problem is that KG has been wearing the bad guy hat and TD the good guy hat for so long you guys are actually spewing popular myths instead of observed facts and behavior.

Being a punk to get into the head of the other team is not selfish. It might be unsportsmanlike, annoying, etc. But it isn't selfish. Go ahead and roll the tape of the 2007-2008 Celts and do try and find the KG in decline playing out of his mind, and turning that entire team into a bunch of defensive stoppers - even Ray Allen, and he turned Perkins into a defensive force. What's Perk up to now? Not the same guy (even before the knee problems)...

You guys are infected with anti-KG antibodies. Like I said my 5 year peak NBA team has TD and not KG. But after this playoff run is over I think career wise KG might have swung TD into the rear view mirror and you guys won't even know because your minds are made up. /Cool

I also never hinted at KG being selfish. He's a douche in my opinion but so were other great players, that doesn't make him a selfish player. He's a great and willing passer and can make plays for others.

And common, we both know neither Duncan nor Garnett are lazy. Both worked hard at their game and both are in great shape for their Age. Duncan actually lost weight before the last season, but his Knee still didn't hold up so he shed some more pounds.

Like I said before Duncan wins out for me because he was the bigger inside Presence on both ends.

Stinkyoutsider
05-18-2012, 12:46 PM
The only guys who don't hate Garnett are the fans for the team he's playing on and his teammates. He's a great teammate but a jerk to everyone else.

I can understand if Garnett was talking junk to Duncan (it's basketball after all) but he went too far if he wished Duncan a happy mother's day? ****, his mom died when he was 14. That's ****** up to say!

Patman
05-18-2012, 12:48 PM
Seriously, a lot of American sportsmedia blow everything out of proportion tenfold. Trying to instigate some sort of beef that isn't there. Horrible.

Duncan doesn't hate Garnett. He has a distaste for some of the things KG might've said or done in the past. It's a cold shoulder, not hatred.

This really contradicts what journalism is about. No nuances, just sound bytes. This is sensationalist, opportunistic pile of dung.

What's so awful about telling things they way they are. Sports Illustrated wrote an otherwise great background story on Duncan, and all the other media vultures seem fixated on this irrelevant tidbit.

Completely agree, it was a really good article by Ballard with many way more interesting things. This was just a very small section. Why is it surprising that some guys in the NBA don't like each other.

bigsams50
05-18-2012, 12:50 PM
Just like your comment about KG being on the spurs would have had the same amount of success or more than TD..

KG is a former MVP, Defensive Player of the Year, and is an NBA champion. Ryan Leaf is a bust. There is literally no sense in the comparison you made

bigsams50
05-18-2012, 12:51 PM
How do you know of Leaf would have been a bust if he went to the colts?!... You don't! Which is my point

KG has proven to be a beast. Top 15 player of all time. The scenarios are waaaay too different. The comparison has no merit

Swashcuff
05-18-2012, 12:59 PM
we using kg as an example 2 give me another 1 superstar that his production went down in the post season same can go for ya :)

The most heralded Karl Malone he is notorious for it and really seen as the low bar for a dip in production... then there is Charles Barkley, Duncan, Dirk and Pettit. Duncan's and Dirk's didn't dip as severely as Barkley's, Garnett's, Pettit's and Malone's however.

Now that's just among PF's. Not even including Ewing, Stockton, D-Rob, Nash, Bird, Dr. J, Magic, Russell, Kobe, Pierce, Shaq, Kareem, Drexler, Parish, Wilt, Iverson, Oscar, etc etc etc.

You see the problem with this simplistic view of a player's production dipping in the post season is that context is not taken into consideration.

I mean it's only LOGICAL that your production is expected to go down. When the playoffs come around the best teams in the league are featured. There aren't any bottom dwellers for you to get fat off, most teams/players are playing with various injuries after playing a grueling 82 game season, in the post seasons team can focus on their singular match up and place greater emphasis on individual star players and make the necessary adjustments. I've only touched the tip of the ice berg here however really it goes even deeper.

There is a reason that when the playoffs reach players tend to really listen to their coaches more than at any time in the regular season. So much is dependent on execution, play sets and getting easy buckets and valuable stops.

That's the entire reason as to why guys like MJ, Hakeem, Moses, Walt Frazier, Rick Barry, T-Mac etc should be made mention of because they were like the exceptions to the rule.

jericho
05-18-2012, 01:13 PM
The most heralded Karl Malone he is notorious for it and really seen as the low bar for a dip in production... then there is Charles Barkley, Duncan, Dirk and Pettit. Duncan's and Dirk's didn't dip as severely as Barkley's, Garnett's, Pettit's and Malone's however.

Now that's just among PF's. Not even including Ewing, Stockton, D-Rob, Nash, Bird, Dr. J, Magic, Russell, Kobe, Pierce, Shaq, Kareem, Drexler, Parish, Wilt, Iverson, Oscar, etc etc etc.

You see the problem with this simplistic view of a player's production dipping in the post season is that context is not taken into consideration.

I mean it's only LOGICAL that your production is expected to go down. When the playoffs come around the best teams in the league are featured. There aren't any bottom dwellers for you to get fat off, most teams/players are playing with various injuries after playing a grueling 82 game season, in the post seasons team can focus on their singular match up and place greater emphasis on individual star players and make the necessary adjustments. I've only touched the tip of the ice berg here however really it goes even deeper.

There is a reason that when the playoffs reach players tend to really listen to their coaches more than at any time in the regular season. So much is dependent on execution, play sets and getting easy buckets and valuable stops.

That's the entire reason as to why guys like MJ, Hakeem, Moses, Walt Frazier, Rick Barry, T-Mac etc should be made mention of because they were like the exceptions to the rule.

ok ok ok i asked you for 1 so you lost lol

yeah you got me :(

Lakerfan In NY
05-18-2012, 01:43 PM
"Duncan’s lifetime numbers versus Garnett’s teams, by the way: 19.4 points per game, 11.6 boards and a 44–17 record, including the postseason."

Rubbish w/o a comparison of the winning percentage of the teams they were on. And rubbish w/o Garnetts stats included.

BR says:

Head to Head inc playoffs: 29-19 in favor of Duncan, not 44-17 (what is the source of the writer?)

Stat Duncan Garnett

PPG: 19.9 - 20.6
RPG: 12.2 - 11.1
AST: 3.3 - 4.3
STL: 0.5 - 1.4
BLK: 1.9 - 2.0

Given the difference in teams, I find it hard to say that Duncan is better then Garnett. Reverse the players and the Title count is liable to be the same.

Couldn't the same agrument be used to explain KG higher numbers?

Chronz
05-18-2012, 02:02 PM
The most heralded Karl Malone he is notorious for it and really seen as the low bar for a dip in production... then there is Charles Barkley, Duncan, Dirk and Pettit. Duncan's and Dirk's didn't dip as severely as Barkley's, Garnett's, Pettit's and Malone's however.

What?

KnicksorBust
05-18-2012, 04:42 PM
No, he merely has a handle on judging someone on generally inferior teams. In the regular season hardly anyone plays D or with intensity. In the playoffs when they are drawing up the TWolves that coach says - stop KG and you win the game. Sad that fanatics can't see the truth.

1. Plenty of coaches have had that strategy and still failed because the superstar athlete was just too good.
2. Doesn't KG's game make him more vulnerable to that strategy than other players?

I checked out his shooting splits and they confirmed what I already believed. Garnett takes more FGAs from 16ft to 3pt than any other shooting range. He lets you keep him out of the paint. He takes fade-aways and deep 2's. He doesn't get to the foul line at the same rate as other all-time greats. His career FTA per game is 4.7 with a peak at 6.7. This drops to 4.5 FTA per game in the post season. It's easier to double big man on the perimeter.

Meanwhile, Tim Duncan will plant his *** down in the paint and make sure if he misses, he's at least getting to the line. His FTA during the regular season are 6.7 for his career with a peak of 8.5 FTA per game. During the post-season his career average improves to 8.1 FTA per game. This is without even factoring in the value that putting other teams in the bonus can have for your teammates and benching of oppositions players.


Why do you keep mentioning dip in production? Historically damn near every single star player in league history has a dip in production when the post season comes around and when you play on the teams that KG has played with that's not surprising to see that it would be the case with him. KG won every individual match up he's ever had in those post seasons. His team however did not and that's why he has been seen in your eyes as such a poor player.

Bagwell alluded to the reasoning earlier and its only logical in all honesty. I'm not talking as if the underdog allows him to lose every series but you are completely ignoring the fact that the other teams were just better. Better structured, better coached and had better casts surrounding their best players or in the Lakers case the best tandem of their time.



This is a crazy trend of thought. An overwhelming disappointment? Really? :pity:

I honestly think you need to go back and analyze those series again.



So were the Lakers dynasty except the fact that the 99 Spurs team had wayyyy better support.

You claimed he won every single individual matchup during those years. So to be fair I went back with full intention to post results and then in his very first series he went against the Houston Rockets.

KG: 52 points / 28 rebounds / 11 assists / 4 steals / 3 blocks with a TS% under 50%.
Barkley: 55 points / 32 rebounds / 13 assists / 1 steal / 2 blocks with a TS% of approximately 60%.

That's 1 series in and already he was outplayed and swept.

Hawkeye15
05-18-2012, 04:48 PM
nitpicking KoB, but KG was 20, Chuck 33. Of course he was outplayed in his very first playoff series by a top 3 PF ever.

Swashcuff
05-18-2012, 07:27 PM
What?


WS/48 PER TS% USG% Ortg USG*Ortg/100
RegSea Playoffs diff RegSea Playoffs diff RegSea Playoffs diff RegSea Playoffs diff RegSea Playoffs diff RegSea Playoffs diff
Barkley 0.216 0.193 -0.023 24.6 24.2 -0.4 0.612 0.584 -0.028 24.8 25.2 0.4 119 118 -1 29.512 29.736 0.224
Garnett 0.190 0.151 -0.039 23.3 21.6 -1.7 0.549 0.519 -0.030 25.2 26.0 0.8 111 105 -6 27.972 27.300 -0.672

Credit to PSK on the work IMO the MVP around this parts when it comes to posting this kind of stuff.

Anywho if we're going to say KG's play dipped in the post season why can't we say the same for Barkley. Of course it was no where near as big a dip as KGs but it was still a dip nonetheless.

Barkley had some great post seasons actually and is far from being bad or anything come playoff time but fact is for his career he had a slight dip in his production.

Swashcuff
05-18-2012, 07:30 PM
You claimed he won every single individual matchup during those years. So to be fair I went back with full intention to post results and then in his very first series he went against the Houston Rockets.

KG: 52 points / 28 rebounds / 11 assists / 4 steals / 3 blocks with a TS% under 50%.
Barkley: 55 points / 32 rebounds / 13 assists / 1 steal / 2 blocks with a TS% of approximately 60%.

That's 1 series in and already he was outplayed and swept.

Don't worry bro save yourself the time. In due time I'll post my rebuttal to this, with a more holistic view than this.

bagwell368
05-18-2012, 07:45 PM
Why don't you look at your fellow Celtics fan and now KG fan of 5 years and tell me what's biased. Saying the Spurs would have 2-3 more titles with KG than TD?

That's my opinion, based off what I've seen from those guys in the playoffs

Take a breath and read again. The other Boston poster didn't say anything up to this point about my posts with KG winning titles Duncan didn't. I also accepted the real chance KG wouldn't win a title or two that Duncan did on that team. So it could very well balance out. But the original poster that said KG wouldn't have won 4 titles for SA never even considered all the other years just looked at the title years. Is that real inquiry? Or just a hatchet job? I see the greatness in both players. I'm a fan of both. I stand up for KG right now because so many people in this thread are leading with dislike/hate of KG and not even in some cases using their analytic abilities. Let's fork the thread. One thread for people that hate KG regardless of anything. The other for people that want to discuss the issues with care and insight.

My friend makes good points. TD had Robinson as a mentor and an all time great coach. KG did not. If KG was obviously better with that as a background, he'd be a top 5 all time player, instead of an obvious top 15.

bagwell368
05-18-2012, 07:46 PM
WS/48 PER TS% USG% Ortg USG*Ortg/100
RegSea Playoffs diff RegSea Playoffs diff RegSea Playoffs diff RegSea Playoffs diff RegSea Playoffs diff RegSea Playoffs diff
Barkley 0.216 0.193 -0.023 24.6 24.2 -0.4 0.612 0.584 -0.028 24.8 25.2 0.4 119 118 -1 29.512 29.736 0.224
Garnett 0.190 0.151 -0.039 23.3 21.6 -1.7 0.549 0.519 -0.030 25.2 26.0 0.8 111 105 -6 27.972 27.300 -0.672

Credit to PSK on the work IMO the MVP around this parts when it comes to posting this kind of stuff.

Anywho if we're going to say KG's play dipped in the post season why can't we say the same for Barkley. Of course it was no where near as big a dip as KGs but it was still a dip nonetheless.

Barkley had some great post seasons actually and is far from being bad or anything come playoff time but fact is for his career he had a slight dip in his production.

Did Barkley play for as many bad teams as KG? Barkley might well have been a better offensive player then TD or KG, but as an all around player? Both of them bury Charles.

Blitzbolt
05-18-2012, 07:48 PM
KG makes fun of cancer!!!

Chronz
05-18-2012, 07:49 PM
WS/48 PER TS% USG% Ortg USG*Ortg/100
RegSea Playoffs diff RegSea Playoffs diff RegSea Playoffs diff RegSea Playoffs diff RegSea Playoffs diff RegSea Playoffs diff
Barkley 0.216 0.193 -0.023 24.6 24.2 -0.4 0.612 0.584 -0.028 24.8 25.2 0.4 119 118 -1 29.512 29.736 0.224
Garnett 0.190 0.151 -0.039 23.3 21.6 -1.7 0.549 0.519 -0.030 25.2 26.0 0.8 111 105 -6 27.972 27.300 -0.672

Credit to PSK on the work IMO the MVP around this parts when it comes to posting this kind of stuff.
Does that include their geriatric years?


Anywho if we're going to say KG's play dipped in the post season why can't we say the same for Barkley. Of course it was no where near as big a dip as KGs but it was still a dip nonetheless.

Because when you account for the defensive strength of those defenses only KG and Malone saw their efficiency levels dip well beyond their expected output. You cant take things literally with these type of things otherwise only Dream was able to raise his game above the defensive upgrade of the post season. You have to keep things relative, and relatively speaking there is a CHASM of a difference between Chuck and KG.

Focusing solely on seasons in which players were considered for the MVP (Top10) Chuck actually maintained his offensive rating and raised his scoring average.




Barkley had some great post seasons actually and is far from being bad or anything come playoff time but fact is for his career he had a slight dip in his production.

Not buying it.

bagwell368
05-18-2012, 07:53 PM
1. Plenty of coaches have had that strategy and still failed because the superstar athlete was just too good.

Talk is cheap, make with examples.


2. Doesn't KG's game make him more vulnerable to that strategy than other players?

I checked out his shooting splits and they confirmed what I already believed. Garnett takes more FGAs from 16ft to 3pt than any other shooting range. He lets you keep him out of the paint. He takes fade-aways and deep 2's. He doesn't get to the foul line at the same rate as other all-time greats. His career FTA per game is 4.7 with a peak at 6.7. This drops to 4.5 FTA per game in the post season. It's easier to double big man on the perimeter.

Meanwhile, Tim Duncan will plant his *** down in the paint and make sure if he misses, he's at least getting to the line. His FTA during the regular season are 6.7 for his career with a peak of 8.5 FTA per game. During the post-season his career average improves to 8.1 FTA per game. This is without even factoring in the value that putting other teams in the bonus can have for your teammates and benching of oppositions players.

I already wrote that IMO TD's advantage/propensity to play in the low post was better then KG's outside game. I also find KG's defense to be better then Duncan's in particular the over year 29 versions of each player.


You claimed he won every single individual matchup during those years.

I'm reading this from the end backwards. I never mentioned Barkley in this thread. Please point to the post you are talking about. This must have something to do with someone else...

Chronz
05-18-2012, 07:58 PM
Did Barkley play for as many bad teams as KG? Barkley might well have been a better offensive player then TD or KG, but as an all around player? Both of them bury Charles.

There are different ways of looking at this, strictly by Defensive RTG the collective efficiency of KG's opponents (throughout his prime) is 103.5. Chucks opponents came in at 105.8. But the difference in regular season to post-season is -1.9 for Chuck, and -1.4 for KG. So relatively speaking Chuck would have it harder to replicate his regular season performance into the post season.

Yet despite this difference Chuck maintained his Offensive RTG while KG's dipped 6 full points when he (Theoretically) should have only lost 2PTS off his efficiency.


Chuck was an offensive animal unlike any other PF in the post season.

bagwell368
05-18-2012, 08:03 PM
I said he had a weight problem?? Where? I said he lost weight to take some pressure on his knees. He didn't HAVE to but it's the reason he's still going strong today.

WHy even bother? You're a KG fan of 4-5 years and you're going to keep arguing your point. What's funny is if TD got drafted to Boston you'd be singing a different tune.

Pal, I've been a fan of the Celts and NBA since 1966. I'm pretty well known as the single most critical Celt fan of Rondo throughout PSD. I've been very slow to warm up to Pierce. I had no real use for JoJo White. I only have one Celt on my all time top 12 career team, and 2 on my one year peak team. I'll even tell anyone that cares that Hakeem was a far better Center then Russell, and I love Havlicek but he was a serious volume scorer in the bad sense of the term. Heck I even have TD on my all time starting team due to his better low post play, how am I a homer again?

And you, some Spur fan what to define me as a homer? My advice is learn more about your adversaries. OTOH, some just don't rate as important enough due to the bankrupt nature of what they write. I won't bother checking out your other writings. Term of the day: puerile fan boy.

Chronz
05-18-2012, 08:04 PM
NVM I thought you were implying that Chuck played against sorrier teams but your saying KG's support was crappier.

Swashcuff
05-18-2012, 08:09 PM
Did Barkley play for as many bad teams as KG? Barkley might well have been a better offensive player then TD or KG, but as an all around player? Both of them bury Charles.

I don't know how you feel about BBReference's GameScore but we can use that as our measuring stick.

We have available to us 110 of Barkley's 123 post season games.

In 110 post season games Barkley has had a game score of 20 (my personal arbitrary cut off point for this discussion) or greater on 51 separate occasions. That's good for 46.3% of his games.

As for KG of his now 114 (115th in progress and I'm praying he has a bad one :p) he has had a game score of 20 or greater on 35 separate occasions. That's good for 30.7%.

Now this is personally unfair to KG because of the mere fact that the large chunk of his playoff games has came outside of his prime years when he finally got the support that he lacked in most of his Minny days in that western conference to really rack up the games.

I think however that its no secret that when using metrics like this a statistical accumulator such as Barkley will feature to be better and its also no secret that Barkley has had the history of being better in the post season than KG (56 point game against Golden State come to mind).

However when we take their opposing man's play into consideration I'm more certain than anything that KG held his man to below his norm than Barkley did.

papirico52
05-18-2012, 08:13 PM
Duncan is THE most boring player EVER!!!!

raiderfaninTX
05-18-2012, 08:16 PM
"Duncan’s lifetime numbers versus Garnett’s teams, by the way: 19.4 points per game, 11.6 boards and a 44–17 record, including the postseason."

Rubbish w/o a comparison of the winning percentage of the teams they were on. And rubbish w/o Garnetts stats included.

BR says:

Head to Head inc playoffs: 29-19 in favor of Duncan, not 44-17 (what is the source of the writer?)

Stat Duncan Garnett

PPG: 19.9 - 20.6
RPG: 12.2 - 11.1
AST: 3.3 - 4.3
STL: 0.5 - 1.4
BLK: 1.9 - 2.0

Given the difference in teams, I find it hard to say that Duncan is better then Garnett. Reverse the players and the Title count is liable to be the same.

Are you ****ing kidding me

pierce duncan and allen together = unstoppable

Swashcuff
05-18-2012, 08:19 PM
Does that include their geriatric years?

Yeah but that benefits Chuck. He played a larger % of his post season games in his prime. So IMO Chuck gains more from that geriatric years argument than KG does.


Because when you account for the defensive strength of those defenses only KG and Malone saw their efficiency levels dip well beyond their expected output. You cant take things literally with these type of things otherwise only Dream was able to raise his game above the defensive upgrade of the post season. You have to keep things relative, and relatively speaking there is a CHASM of a difference between Chuck and KG.

Focusing solely on seasons in which players were considered for the MVP (Top10) Chuck actually maintained his offensive rating and raised his scoring average.

Agreed.

See the thing is that a poster said that I couldn't give another example of a player who's production dipped in the post season and Chuck's did overall.


Not buying it.

You don't have to Chronz the evidence is there. He was a phenomenal player and had great post seasons but on a whole his production dipped slightly at least according to what is widely seen as some of the best advanced metrics when having these types of debates.

bagwell368
05-18-2012, 08:19 PM
There are different ways of looking at this, strictly by Defensive RTG the collective efficiency of KG's opponents (throughout his prime) is 103.5. Chucks opponents came in at 105.8. But the difference in regular season to post-season -1.9 for Chuck and and -1.4 for KG. So relatively speaking Chuck would have it harder to replicate his regular season performance into the post season.

Yet despite this difference Chuck maintained his Offensive RTG while KG's dipped 6 full points when he (Theoretically) should have only lost 2PTS off his efficiency.


Chuck was an offensive animal unlike any other PF in the post season.

I did not know those details. Chuck was great, but in McHale's prime years, he played him to a standstill at worse (better efficiency but lower totals stats), so it was clear he was great, but he wasn't overwhelming.

Barkley was a great D rebounder, but I didn't find him very imposing on D overall, but, that's w/o adjustments added in. His longevity was also impressive. He generally gets put 4th or 5th in lists as I recall. But, we're getting off topic at this point.

bagwell368
05-18-2012, 08:24 PM
Are you ****ing kidding me

pierce duncan and allen together = unstoppable

Are you kidding me? KG played better that year then Duncan for starters.

AND: why should Boston have Duncan? The point was no Duncan on SA in 2007-2008 replaced by KG. Nobody specified if or where Duncan would be. Why not on some crap dead end franchise - like Minny. Read the whole thread, you might have a better idea of what is going on.

Swashcuff
05-18-2012, 08:24 PM
Let it be known that I think Barkley is a better post season performer than KG but the only reason I am making an argument for KG is because I think he is knocked too much for not being better than he was in the playoffs.

kdspurman
05-18-2012, 08:38 PM
Pal, I've been a fan of the Celts and NBA since 1966. I'm pretty well known as the single most critical Celt fan of Rondo throughout PSD. I've been very slow to warm up to Pierce. I had no real use for JoJo White. I only have one Celt on my all time top 12 career team, and 2 on my one year peak team. I'll even tell anyone that cares that Hakeem was a far better Center then Russell, and I love Havlicek but he was a serious volume scorer in the bad sense of the term. Heck I even have TD on my all time starting team due to his better low post play, how am I a homer again?

And you, some Spur fan what to define me as a homer? My advice is learn more about your adversaries. OTOH, some just don't rate as important enough due to the bankrupt nature of what they write. I won't bother checking out your other writings. Term of the day: puerile fan boy.

I'm not doubting your loyalty to the Celtics...Nor your knowledge of the game. What I'm saying is your defending KG when you've been a fan of his since probably since he went to Boston right? Have you watched him his whole career? You're going off of basketballreference and while those tell a lot, they don't make you an expert nor do they tell the whole story. You can't make all these assessments based off of the numbers, it just doesn't work that way.

Example: If you insert Lebron into Jordan's championship years when he's had some amazing numbers does that mean Chicago wins the ship for sure?

Call me a fan boy all you want, but it goes both ways dude... If KG stayed in Minny I don't think you would provide any argument. (that's why I said homer)

We'll agree to disagree on this.

Chronz
05-18-2012, 08:43 PM
Yeah but that benefits Chuck. He played a larger % of his post season games in his prime. So IMO Chuck gains more from that geriatric years argument than KG does.
Maybe, I still dont like factoring in games that dont include prime years.


Agreed.

See the thing is that a poster said that I couldn't give another example of a player who's production dipped in the post season and Chuck's did overall.
Can you prove that?



You don't have to Chronz the evidence is there. He was a phenomenal player and had great post seasons but on a whole his production dipped slightly at least according to what is widely seen as some of the best advanced metrics when having these types of debates.

Ive seen advanced versions of those advanced metrics, they disagree.

Swashcuff
05-18-2012, 08:49 PM
Maybe, I still dont like factoring in games that dont include prime years.

In this instance its only fair to KG.


Can you prove that?

Chronz the metrics PSK posted are legit. By those metrics its proven. Here is the link (http://forums.prosportsdaily.com/showpost.php?p=21823460&postcount=1) to the post if you haven't seen it.


Ive seen advanced versions of those advanced metrics, they disagree.

I haven't and personally I'd love it if you could share it with us.

PS loving the addition to your sig :laugh2:

StinkEye
05-18-2012, 08:50 PM
Duncan is THE most boring player EVER!!!!

You must not play actual basketball. If you did you'd have an appreciation for Timmy's game.

Chronz
05-18-2012, 10:02 PM
In this instance its only fair to KG.
I Dont get it.


Chronz the metrics PSK posted are legit. By those metrics its proven. Here is the link (http://forums.prosportsdaily.com/showpost.php?p=21823460&postcount=1) to the post if you haven't seen it.

Ive seen it, not buying your claims.


I haven't and personally I'd love it if you could share it with us.

Ive mentioned them in this thread. The whole his offensive rtg staying in line whereas KG saw his decline beyond their expected means.

Offensively there was no PF like Chuck. Crashed the glass, shot a high% and involved his teammates.

Swashcuff
05-18-2012, 10:11 PM
I Dont get it.

Because most of KGs prime wasn't spent making deep playoff runs with the Wolves.


Ive seen it, not buying your claims.


Its not my claims Chronz I don't understand where you get these things from. It's there in plain and simple black and white.


Ive mentioned them in this thread. The whole his offensive rtg staying in line whereas KG saw his decline beyond their expected means.

Offensively there was no PF like Chuck. Crashed the glass, shot a high% and involved his teammates.

You don't get it though. I am NOT comparing Barkley to KG. I'm pointing out that Barkley too was not as good statistically in the post season as he was in the regular season.

Also Barkley's offensive rating hasn't didn't improve in the post season. So if that's your only argument then even that is flawed.

Chronz
05-18-2012, 10:38 PM
Because most of KGs prime wasn't spent making deep playoff runs with the Wolves.

Ill stick to focusing on prime numbers thank you very much. Not saying the other years are irrelevant but its not as important. You can say they dont matter, but its still much more relevant to focus on prime playing days.


Its not my claims Chronz I don't understand where you get these things from. It's there in plain and simple black and white.
I thought you were claiming that Chucks #'s dipped in the post season. If you think stats are that black and white then you dont understand the fun in statistical analysis. Who you play matters, accounting for that defense is pretty important IMO.



You don't get it though. I am NOT comparing Barkley to KG. I'm pointing out that Barkley too was not as good statistically in the post season as he was in the regular season.
But you havent proven that. And pretending you had a point, if you were to make that claim then what superstar couldnt you make that claim for?


Also Barkley's offensive rating hasn't didn't improve in the post season. So if that's your only argument then even that is flawed.
I said he sustained it while increasing his scoring rate, despite an expected dip of -2. Whereas KG lost 6.

Chronz
05-18-2012, 10:42 PM
Let it be known that I think Barkley is a better post season performer than KG but the only reason I am making an argument for KG is because I think he is knocked too much for not being better than he was in the playoffs.
The reason he is knocked is because the diminished production was greater than what you would expect given the defensive environment. And far greater than a man who essentially remained the same statistically.

Swashcuff
05-18-2012, 11:07 PM
Ill stick to focusing on prime numbers thank you very much. Not saying the other years are irrelevant but its not as important. You can say they dont matter, but its still much more relevant to focus on prime playing days.

I thought you were claiming that Chucks #'s dipped in the post season. If you think stats are that black and white then you dont understand the fun in statistical analysis. Who you play matters, accounting for that defense is pretty important IMO.

But you havent proven that. And pretending you had a point, if you were to make that claim then what superstar couldnt you make that claim for?

I said he sustained it while increasing his scoring rate, despite an expected dip of -2. Whereas KG lost 6.

Didn't I tell you already that I was not comparing Barkley to KG? Why are you continuing to prove something I have already said on numerous occasions that Chuck was better than KG in the post season.

I honestly don't think you understand exactly what I am saying. You must not have read through my posts in this thread because if you did this debate would have ended a long time ago. You're basically making the same points that I made in KGs favour when I said you need to take into consideration their opponents as well. Hell in the very first post you quoted me in I made that exact same point, a point to which you completely ignored and only paid attention to the fact that I mentioned Barkley's name.

I'm on too much of a high right now to continue this debate right now. I'm just going to finish my rebuttal to KoB.

Longhornfan1234
05-18-2012, 11:11 PM
Duncan beat Latrell Knicks, the Nets, a bunch of role player pistons, and some other spare east team...lol

Chronz
05-18-2012, 11:16 PM
Didn't I tell you already that I was not comparing Barkley to KG? Why are you continuing to prove something I have already said on numerous occasions that Chuck was better than KG in the post season.
Yes we both know that, I dont see what makes you think Im disagreeing with that.


I honestly don't think you understand exactly what I am saying. You must not have read through my posts in this thread because if you did this debate would have ended a long time ago. You're basically making the same points that I made in KGs favour when I said you need to take into consideration their opponents as well. Hell in the very first post you quoted me in I made that exact same point, a point to which you completely ignored and only paid attention to the fact that I mentioned Barkley's name.

Im only taking offense that you lumped Chuck among the group of players whos play leveled off in the playoffs. And if you examined his numbers throughout his prime you would see that simply isnt the case. And if your basing it on raw statistics then who exactly raises their game in the playoffs? I agree most players lose abit of their production, even when you account for the defenses. If thats all your trying to say then OK, but that would imply that nobody rises to the occasion since everyones stats level off. Im saying its relative, its definitely NOT black and white.


I'm on too much of a high right now to continue this debate right now. I'm just going to finish my rebuttal to KoB.

This isnt a phone call bro, you can take as much time as you want, we're not going anywhere.

Chronz
05-18-2012, 11:20 PM
Duncan beat Latrell Knicks, the Nets, a bunch of role player pistons, and some other spare east team...lol

What about the West?

Hustla23
05-18-2012, 11:23 PM
Duncan beat Latrell Knicks, the Nets, a bunch of role player pistons, and some other spare east team...lol
That "Latrell" Knicks team was the best basketball team I've ever watched.

Damn you Timmy. :cry:

Longhornfan1234
05-18-2012, 11:26 PM
What about the West?

The vaunted Mavs and Suns.

Chronz
05-19-2012, 01:52 AM
The vaunted Mavs and Suns.

Lakers, Blazers, Jazz

KnicksorBust
05-19-2012, 10:30 AM
Don't worry bro save yourself the time. In due time I'll post my rebuttal to this, with a more holistic view than this.

I was able to save myself a lot of time. I only had to check 1 series. :)


Talk is cheap, make with examples.


LeBron with the Cavs - All Seasons
Kobe with the Lakers Post-Shaq/Pre-Gasol
Hakeem with the 93 Rockets



I already wrote that IMO TD's advantage/propensity to play in the low post was better then KG's outside game. I also find KG's defense to be better then Duncan's in particular the over year 29 versions of each player.


So you are admitting that Duncan is a better #1 option offensively than Garnett? That's a step in the right direction.

In regards to your second comment, Duncan holds the NBA Record for All-Defensive teams and has anchored an top defensive Spurs team for a decade so the thought of KG's defense having a significant advantage over Duncan is a stretch. Even if I concede that KG is a more versatile defender, Duncan is still elite defensively as well. What Duncan gives offensively more than makes up any small difference.



I'm reading this from the end backwards. I never mentioned Barkley in this thread. Please point to the post you are talking about. This must have something to do with someone else...

That post was not directed to you.

Swashcuff
05-19-2012, 10:36 AM
You claimed he won every single individual matchup during those years. So to be fair I went back with full intention to post results and then in his very first series he went against the Houston Rockets.

KG: 52 points / 28 rebounds / 11 assists / 4 steals / 3 blocks with a TS% under 50%.
Barkley: 55 points / 32 rebounds / 13 assists / 1 steal / 2 blocks with a TS% of approximately 60%.

That's 1 series in and already he was outplayed and swept.

Backing my claim

1997 Lost to the Houston Rockets 3-0

Garnett averaged: 17.3 points, 9.3 rebs, 3.7 ast, 47% FG
Barkley averaged: 18.3 points, 10.2 rebs, 4.1 ast, 51% FG

I really need to do further digging on this series (couldn't find a film of this series anywhere) but I really don't know if I want to read through 15 year old articles just to prove a point for a player not named Allen Iverson :p. I do however would like to believe that KG saw Hakeem quite a lot in this series and that could have affected his numbers.

1998 Lost to the Seattle Supersonics 3-2

Garnett averaged: 15.8 points, 9.6 rebs, 4.0 ast, 48% FG
Baker averaged: 14.8 points, 10.5 rebs, 1.3 ast, 58% FG

Baker went on to score at a higher rate against the Lakers in the next round. As for this match up I'd consider it a wash and maybe slightly in KGs favour though he was not able to produce at a high level offensively this series.

1999 Lost to San Antonio Spurs 3-1

Garnett was matched up on Tim Duncan, and here are their averages against each other that series followed by Duncan's averages over the rest of the playoffs (against Lakers, Trailblazers and Knicks):

Garnett averaged: 21.8 points (44.3% FG, 4.3 FTM/game), 12 reb, 3.8 ast, 2.3 blk, 1.5 stl
Duncan averaged: 18.8 points (46% FG, 4.3 FTM/game), 10.8 reb, 3.3 ast, 3 blk, 0.8 stl
Duncan (non-Wolves): 24.6 points (52.5% FG, 6.9 FTM/game), 11.7 reb, 2.7 ast, 2.5 blk, 0.8 stl

2000 Lost to Portland Trailblazers 3-1

In that series KG had 2 triple-doubles in 4 games; was obviously drawing the defenses attention and distributing well (9 apg) which helped contribute to teammates shooting well; he defensively erased the best player on the opposing team in his 1-on-1 match-up (Sheed averaged 13.5 ppg in 42 min/game against Wolves in round 1, 22.3 pp42 against Jazz and Lakers in next 2 rounds)

2001 Lost to San Antonio Spurs 3-1

Garnett averaged: 21 points (46.6% FG, 7.5 FTM/game), 12 reb, 4.3 ast, 1.5 blk, 1 stl
Duncan averaged: 22.5 points (46% FG, 5.5 FTM/game), 13 reb, 3.5 ast, 2 blk, 1 stl
Duncan (non-Wolves): 25.2 points (49.7% FG, 6 FTM/game), 15.1 reb, 3.9 ast, 3 blk, 1.1 stl

2002 Lost to Dallas Mavericks 3-0

Garnett averaged 24 points, 18.7 rebounds, 5.0 assists, 43% FG
Nowitzki averaged 33.3 points, 15.7 rebounds, 0.7 assists, 53% FG

2003 Lost to Los Angeles Lakers 4-2

Garnett averaged 27 points, 15.7 rebounds, 5.2 assists, 51% FG
Robert Horry avg: 6.8 points, 5.5 rebounds, 4.3 assists, 37% FG

2004 Beat Denver Nuggets 4-1

Garnett averaged: 25.8 points, 14.8 reb, 7.0 asts, 45% FG
Marcus Camby avg: 12.6 points, 11.4 reb, 2.4 asts, 49% FG

Beat Sacramento Kings 4-3

Garnett averaged: 23.9 points, 15.4 reb, 4.3 assists, 44% FG
Webber averaged: 17.7 poings, 7.6 reb, 3.4 assists, 46% FG

Lost to LA Lakers 4-2

Garnett averaged: 23.7 points, 13.5 reb, 4.5 asts, 46% FG
Malone averaged: 12 points, 9.3 reb, 4.7 assists, 46% FG

2008 Defeated Atlanta Hawks 4-3

Garnett averaged: 21 points, 8.9 reb, 3.9 asts, 48% FG
Josh Smith avged: 15.7 points, 6.4 reb, 2.9 asts, 40% FG

Defeated Cleveland Cavaliers 4-3

Garnett averaged: 19.6 points, 10.9 reb, 3.1 ast, 55% FG
Varejao + Wallace: 8.0 points, 10.5 reb, 1.4 ast, 49% FG

Defeated the Detroit Pistons 4-2

Garnett averaged: 24 points, 7.7 reb, 2 asts, 54% FG
Sheed Wallace avg: 12 points, 7 reb, 1.7 ast, 42% FG

Defeated LA Lakers 4-2

Garnett averaged: 18.2 points, 13 reb, 3 asts, 43% FG
Lamar Odom avg: 13.5 ppg, 9 reb, 3 ast, 52% FG

2010 Defeated Miami Heat 4-1

Garnett averaged: 15.8 points, 8 reb, 2 asts, 58% FG
Beasley against Cs (Garnett on court): 9.3 points/36 min, 32% FG
Beasley against Cs (Garnett off court): 23.4 points/36 min, 62% FG
Beasley reg season: 17.9 pts/36 min, 45% FG

Defeated Cleveland 4-2

Garnett averaged: 18.8 points, 8 rebs and 2 asts 52% FG
Jamison against Cs (Garnett on court): 11.2 pts/36, 38% FG
Jamison against Cs (Garnett off court): 26.0 pts/36, 56% FG
Jamison playoffs non-Cs: 19.4 pts/36, 51% FG

Defeated Orland 4-2

Garnett averaged: 10.3 points, 8 rebs, 2 asts 39% FG
Lewis against Cs (Garnett on court): 5.1 pts/36, 24% FG
Lewis against Cs (Garnett off court): 17.3 pts/36, 48% FG
Lewis playoffs non-Cs: 16.4 pts/36, 54% FG

Lost to LA Lakers 4-3

(#s through first 5 games only)
Garnett when Gasol was on the court: 19.1 pts/36, 63% FG
Gasol against Cs (Garnett on court): 11.5 pts/36, 52% FG
Gasol against Cs (Garnett off court): 20.0 pts/36, 51% FG
Gasol playoffs non-Cs: 18.6 pts/36, 57% FG

2011 Beat New York Knicks 4-0

Garnett averaged: 15.5 points, 11.3 reb, 3.5 ast, 46% FG
Amare averaged: 14.5 points, 7.8 reb,1.8 ast, 38% FG (of course Amar'e was injured so this isn't really fair but just for the sake of argument)

Lost to Miami Heat 4-1

Garnett averaged: 14.4 points, 10.6 reb, 1.8 asts, 43% FG
Bosh averaged: 12.8 points, 10.2 reb, 1.4 asts, 40.4% FG

2012 beat the Atlanta Hawks 4-2

Garnett averaged: 18.7 points, 10.5 rebs, 2 asts, 51% FG
Smith averaged: 16.8 points, 11.3 rebs, 4.8 asts, 39% FG

2012 about to lose to the Phildadelphia 76ers :p

So all and all from 1997-2012 exclusive of the current series against the 76ers Kevin Garnett played in 21 series in the post season and in those 21 he was outplayed on 3 occasions. Those 3 occasions came in the first 8 year that we were debating. However it came against Charles Barkley (rebounding much more against other opponents that post season) Tim Duncan (who KG limited better than any other PF in that run) and Dirk (well Dirk just scored at a high level in that series).

Against Barkley/Hakeem (it would be nice if Chronz, Hawkeye15 or Bagwell can give some added insight on this series I'm too young to remember) KG was in his 2nd season in the league and his first post season ever. No one could have chosen those Wolves over those Rokckets.

Against Duncan in 2001 he had a respectable series (21 points (46.6% FG, 7.5 FTM/game), 12 reb, 4.3 ast, 1.5 blk, 1 stl) I honestly can't see anyone saying he choked in this one.

Against Dirk he also had a great run averaging 24 points, 18.7 rebounds, 5.0 assists, 43% FG but Dirk was just that much better than he was. He didn't yuck it up or "choke" or anything of that nature the Mavs were flat out plain and simply better. There was no changing that.

Now can we blame KG for not limiting Dirk, Barkley and TD (3 PFs that would be regarded by many as top 5 offensively all time) better? In one series (1999) he completely outplayed TD but the Spurs got the win and TD got fat against his other opponents. That however wasn't the only series in which TD was outproduced as we all remember Amar'e in 2005 for the Suns scoring greater than 30 in each game of that 5 game series but they came out losers in that one due to the fact that the Spurs were just flat out better. Amar'e played better against TD in that series than Dirk did against KG in 02.

IMO if you can still say that KG was a choker in the post season after all of these facts discrediting that trend of thought then there is not changing you.

Swashcuff
05-19-2012, 10:39 AM
I was able to save myself a lot of time. I only had to check 1 series. :)

I have already conceded that I was wrong about this but I have posted more substantial evidence to prove your claim about KG being a routine choker wrong. He didn't choke in that series against Barkley nor did he win the match-up. I think we can both concede that we were incorrect.

Geekusa311
05-19-2012, 11:42 AM
After reading this- if it's true about KG- man, I hope Elton Brand clocks him right on that glass chin.

Just flat out dust the creep

KnicksorBust
05-19-2012, 12:28 PM
KG outplayed every opponent he faced in these series. Okay I'm ready.


Backing my claim

1997 Lost to the Houston Rockets 3-0

Garnett averaged: 17.3 points, 9.3 rebs, 3.7 ast, 47% FG
Barkley averaged: 18.3 points, 10.2 rebs, 4.1 ast, 51% FG

I really need to do further digging on this series (couldn't find a film of this series anywhere) but I really don't know if I want to read through 15 year old articles just to prove a point for a player not named Allen Iverson :p. I do however would like to believe that KG saw Hakeem quite a lot in this series and that could have affected his numbers.
.

KG 0-1.



1998 Lost to the Seattle Supersonics 3-2

Garnett averaged: 15.8 points, 9.6 rebs, 4.0 ast, 48% FG
Baker averaged: 14.8 points, 10.5 rebs, 1.3 ast, 58% FG

Baker went on to score at a higher rate against the Lakers in the next round. As for this match up I'd consider it a wash and maybe slightly in KGs favour though he was not able to produce at a high level offensively this series.
.

You said in one of your earlier posts that KG's defense was "that great." Yet Baker was dropping 15-11 on him and shooting almost 60%. That's not outplaying anybody.

KG 0-2.


1999 Lost to San Antonio Spurs 3-1

Garnett was matched up on Tim Duncan, and here are their averages against each other that series followed by Duncan's averages over the rest of the playoffs (against Lakers, Trailblazers and Knicks):

Garnett averaged: 21.8 points (44.3% FG, 4.3 FTM/game), 12 reb, 3.8 ast, 2.3 blk, 1.5 stl
Duncan averaged: 18.8 points (46% FG, 4.3 FTM/game), 10.8 reb, 3.3 ast, 3 blk, 0.8 stl
Duncan (non-Wolves): 24.6 points (52.5% FG, 6.9 FTM/game), 11.7 reb, 2.7 ast, 2.5 blk, 0.8 stl
.

I love that you included the free throws in this post. :clap: I'll give Garnett the nod here.

KG 1-2.


2000 Lost to Portland Trailblazers 3-1

In that series KG had 2 triple-doubles in 4 games; was obviously drawing the defenses attention and distributing well (9 apg) which helped contribute to teammates shooting well; he defensively erased the best player on the opposing team in his 1-on-1 match-up (Sheed averaged 13.5 ppg in 42 min/game against Wolves in round 1, 22.3 pp42 against Jazz and Lakers in next 2 rounds)
.

He did carry them to a win with a triple double. It's a shame that he followed that up with a classic KG 5-20 from the field game to end his season. :)

His 6-20 performance in game 1 might have hurt them too...

Also, he "erased" Sheed. :laugh:

Sheed's stats:
Game 1 - 6 for 10 FG / 3 for 3 FT for 15 points
Game 2 - 3 for 9 FG / 3 for 5 FT for 9 points
Game 3 - 7 for 12 FG / 0 FT for 15 points
Game 4 - 6 for 11 FG / 3 for 4 FT for 15 points.

Overall: 22 for 42 FG (52%FG) for 13.5 PPG. 3 quality starts in 4 games.

Everytime I'm ready to say "agree to disagree" and move on you say something that is just so wrong.

KG 1-3.


2001 Lost to San Antonio Spurs 3-1

Garnett averaged: 21 points (46.6% FG, 7.5 FTM/game), 12 reb, 4.3 ast, 1.5 blk, 1 stl
Duncan averaged: 22.5 points (46% FG, 5.5 FTM/game), 13 reb, 3.5 ast, 2 blk, 1 stl
Duncan (non-Wolves): 25.2 points (49.7% FG, 6 FTM/game), 15.1 reb, 3.9 ast, 3 blk, 1.1 stl
.

Wash. KG 1-3 still.


2002 Lost to Dallas Mavericks 3-0

Garnett averaged 24 points, 18.7 rebounds, 5.0 assists, 43% FG
Nowitzki averaged 33.3 points, 15.7 rebounds, 0.7 assists, 53% FG
.

KG 1-4 in outplaying his opponents.


2003 Lost to Los Angeles Lakers 4-2

Garnett averaged 27 points, 15.7 rebounds, 5.2 assists, 51% FG
Robert Horry avg: 6.8 points, 5.5 rebounds, 4.3 assists, 37% FG
.

KG 2-4.


2004 Beat Denver Nuggets 4-1

Garnett averaged: 25.8 points, 14.8 reb, 7.0 asts, 45% FG
Marcus Camby avg: 12.6 points, 11.4 reb, 2.4 asts, 49% FG
.

I'm lookin at those Camby numbers and I'm really not impressed. Camby was never a bigtime scorer. I'll give KG the "win" but it's not exactly earth shattering.

KG 3-4.


Beat Sacramento Kings 4-3

Garnett averaged: 23.9 points, 15.4 reb, 4.3 assists, 44% FG
Webber averaged: 17.7 poings, 7.6 reb, 3.4 assists, 46% FG
.

KG 4-4.


Lost to LA Lakers 4-2

Garnett averaged: 23.7 points, 13.5 reb, 4.5 asts, 46% FG
Malone averaged: 12 points, 9.3 reb, 4.7 assists, 46% FG.

Similar to the Camby. That was the type of player Malone was on the Lakers. He wasn't the 20-10 guy from Utah. They had Shaq and Kobe. Speaking of, Duncan was going toe to toe with Shaq to get past the Lakers. And getting the job done. KG was playing against a past his prime Mailman. I'll give it to him anyway.

KG 5-4.


2008 Defeated Atlanta Hawks 4-3

Garnett averaged: 21 points, 8.9 reb, 3.9 asts, 48% FG
Josh Smith avged: 15.7 points, 6.4 reb, 2.9 asts, 40% FG

Defeated Cleveland Cavaliers 4-3

Garnett averaged: 19.6 points, 10.9 reb, 3.1 ast, 55% FG
Varejao + Wallace: 8.0 points, 10.5 reb, 1.4 ast, 49% FG

Defeated the Detroit Pistons 4-2

Garnett averaged: 24 points, 7.7 reb, 2 asts, 54% FG
Sheed Wallace avg: 12 points, 7 reb, 1.7 ast, 42% FG

Defeated LA Lakers 4-2

Garnett averaged: 18.2 points, 13 reb, 3 asts, 43% FG
Lamar Odom avg: 13.5 ppg, 9 reb, 3 ast, 52% FG

2010 Defeated Miami Heat 4-1

Garnett averaged: 15.8 points, 8 reb, 2 asts, 58% FG
Beasley against Cs (Garnett on court): 9.3 points/36 min, 32% FG
Beasley against Cs (Garnett off court): 23.4 points/36 min, 62% FG
Beasley reg season: 17.9 pts/36 min, 45% FG

Defeated Cleveland 4-2

Garnett averaged: 18.8 points, 8 rebs and 2 asts 52% FG
Jamison against Cs (Garnett on court): 11.2 pts/36, 38% FG
Jamison against Cs (Garnett off court): 26.0 pts/36, 56% FG
Jamison playoffs non-Cs: 19.4 pts/36, 51% FG

Defeated Orland 4-2

Garnett averaged: 10.3 points, 8 rebs, 2 asts 39% FG
Lewis against Cs (Garnett on court): 5.1 pts/36, 24% FG
Lewis against Cs (Garnett off court): 17.3 pts/36, 48% FG
Lewis playoffs non-Cs: 16.4 pts/36, 54% FG

Lost to LA Lakers 4-3

(#s through first 5 games only)
Garnett when Gasol was on the court: 19.1 pts/36, 63% FG
Gasol against Cs (Garnett on court): 11.5 pts/36, 52% FG
Gasol against Cs (Garnett off court): 20.0 pts/36, 51% FG
Gasol playoffs non-Cs: 18.6 pts/36, 57% FG

2011 Beat New York Knicks 4-0

Garnett averaged: 15.5 points, 11.3 reb, 3.5 ast, 46% FG
Amare averaged: 14.5 points, 7.8 reb,1.8 ast, 38% FG (of course Amar'e was injured so this isn't really fair but just for the sake of argument)

Lost to Miami Heat 4-1

Garnett averaged: 14.4 points, 10.6 reb, 1.8 asts, 43% FG
Bosh averaged: 12.8 points, 10.2 reb, 1.4 asts, 40.4% FG

2012 beat the Atlanta Hawks 4-2

Garnett averaged: 18.7 points, 10.5 rebs, 2 asts, 51% FG
Smith averaged: 16.8 points, 11.3 rebs, 4.8 asts, 39% FG

2012 about to lose to the Phildadelphia 76ers :p
.

These are all irrelevant as I said since he went to Boston the label doesn't fit.



He's clearly played his way out of that label but that doesn't abolish that those seasons were happening simultanously to Duncan winning 2 league MVPs and 2 Finals MVPs.


So all and all from 1997-2012 exclusive of the current series against the 76ers Kevin Garnett played in 21 series in the post season and in those 21 he was outplayed on 3 occasions. Those 3 occasions came in the first 8 year that we were debating. However it came against Charles Barkley (rebounding much more against other opponents that post season) Tim Duncan (who KG limited better than any other PF in that run) and Dirk (well Dirk just scored at a high level in that series).

Against Barkley/Hakeem (it would be nice if Chronz, Hawkeye15 or Bagwell can give some added insight on this series I'm too young to remember) KG was in his 2nd season in the league and his first post season ever. No one could have chosen those Wolves over those Rokckets.

Against Duncan in 2001 he had a respectable series (21 points (46.6% FG, 7.5 FTM/game), 12 reb, 4.3 ast, 1.5 blk, 1 stl) I honestly can't see anyone saying he choked in this one.

Against Dirk he also had a great run averaging 24 points, 18.7 rebounds, 5.0 assists, 43% FG but Dirk was just that much better than he was. He didn't yuck it up or "choke" or anything of that nature the Mavs were flat out plain and simply better. There was no changing that.

Now can we blame KG for not limiting Dirk, Barkley and TD (3 PFs that would be regarded by many as top 5 offensively all time) better? In one series (1999) he completely outplayed TD but the Spurs got the win and TD got fat against his other opponents. That however wasn't the only series in which TD was outproduced as we all remember Amar'e in 2005 for the Suns scoring greater than 30 in each game of that 5 game series but they came out losers in that one due to the fact that the Spurs were just flat out better. Amar'e played better against TD in that series than Dirk did against KG in 02.
.

You made the claim that KG "outplayed all his opponents." You just proved how wrong that statement was wrong. KG did not outplay Barkley, Baker, Dirk, or Duncan (in the other series).

The problem with this whole debate is that KG "outplaying" Robert Horry or Marcus Camby doesn't mean he can't be a labelled a choker. It's not like he didn't have all-star teammates. There are plenty of examples of stars winning without all-star teammates yet Garnett really only one had strong post-season run in his whole tenure with the Wolves. He's also the only top 25 player of all-time to miss the playoffs THREE STRAIGHT SEASONS. How can he get a pass on that?

Look at what Kobe did with that Smush-Kwame-Odom-Walton team.
Or LeBron with Snow-Gooden-BigZ
Or Hakeem winning a ring with Vernon Maxwell as his 2nd best teammate.


IMO if you can still say that KG was a choker in the post season after all of these facts discrediting that trend of thought then there is not changing you.

For his career I don't believe he's a choker. His close out game to beat the Lakers was more than enough proof for me. However, the moniker was appropriate for the start of his career.


I have already conceded that I was wrong about this but I have posted more substantial evidence to prove your claim about KG being a routine choker wrong. He didn't choke in that series against Barkley nor did he win the match-up. I think we can both concede that we were incorrect.

For him to be a choker he has to blow every series for 7 years? Your standard for "choker" is so narrow that I'm not sure anyone would fit the criteria. Of course he's going to have a couple triple-doubles and good games. He's a 1st ballot HoFer.

However his propensity for coming up the smallest in the biggest games of the season was shocking.

Look at his shooting performances in season-ending games.

1997 - 7 for 16 FG
1998 - 3 for 11 FG (10 turnovers)
1999 - 6 for 20 FG
2000 - 5 for 20 FG
2001 - 6 for 13 FG
2002 - 9 for 19 FG
2003 - 9 for 21 FG
2004 - 9 for 20 FG (8 turnovers)

He did not shoot 50% in ANY game and had two horrific turnover performances virtually guaranteeing the end of his team's season.

Shkelqim
05-19-2012, 12:35 PM
Ding Ding we got a winnner^

bagwell368
05-19-2012, 01:23 PM
I'm not doubting your loyalty to the Celtics...Nor your knowledge of the game. What I'm saying is your defending KG when you've been a fan of his since probably since he went to Boston right?

No, I was interested in him from day 1, but didn't get to to see him enough until he came. It's hard not being a fan of his after his transformation of the Celts in one year. Bird is the only other Celtic with a similar impact. As a 4/5 in my career, I'm very interested in all such players. More so the better ones.


Have you watched him his whole career?

How could I? I was raising a family and holding down some demanding jobs. I saw highlights and I read about him, and saw him when he played the Celts twice a year. Every Minny games at the time were not available on cable.


You're going off of basketballreference and while those tell a lot, they don't make you an expert nor do they tell the whole story. You can't make all these assessments based off of the numbers, it just doesn't work that way.

I played in college. If I didn't have joint issues I was born with it would have been a full boat to a D1. I've coached for almost 15 years, and been a fan much longer. Underestimating people you don't know can be a mistake.


Example: If you insert Lebron into Jordan's championship years when he's had some amazing numbers does that mean Chicago wins the ship for sure?

Example of what? A poor job coming up with a fair comp? Besides I saw Jordan play real time, did you? If not then you got all your information from reputation, highlight reels and stats. Right? Go ahead and start telling me about Bill Russell and Wilt while you are it...


Call me a fan boy all you want, but it goes both ways dude...

LOL, I'm 55.


If KG stayed in Minny I don't think you would provide any argument. (that's why I said homer)

We'll never know. But I've been known to argue lots of players in all 3 sports I follow that have nothing to do with my team, and usually its controversial players.

bagwell368
05-19-2012, 01:36 PM
So you are admitting that Duncan is a better #1 option offensively than Garnett? That's a step in the right direction.

Admitting? I was writing about that in the past around here. But be careful. I like Duncan's low post game and his effort put in. I find KG's game down low about the equal of Duncan's, but he doesn't spend that much time there. OTOH, from say 13' of the hoop and beyond KG is clearly better then Duncan.


Even if I concede that KG is a more versatile defender, Duncan is still elite defensively as well. What Duncan gives offensively more than makes up any small difference.

But, I didn't tease out my prior words enough, Duncan and KG are different on offense. I prefer my 4/5's to be great at both, but if they are better at one I like low post rather then high post.

In say 1999, KG could not guard Centers. Centers are a bit smaller now, now he can. But KG can deal with 3's if he has to, and Duncan AFAIK can only deal with them in the paint.

I'm just sorry that two such great players by virtue of the snarky/nasty personality of one can come out looking like a great player and some bum. I would take either one (and yes career wise both are on my all time top 12).

bagwell368
05-19-2012, 01:43 PM
Re post #177

What a colossal waste of "ink". A player on a weak team that is the only real threat is going to get hammered with double teams etc. far in excess of a guy like Duncan.

Remember the Bird vs Magic NCAAA finals. Bird had a crappy game - because he was triple teamed.

The other way to look at it, is KG was playing hard all the time and had nothing extra for the playoffs while Duncan was cruising through the regular season and had plenty left to amp up for the playoffs. Better coach, better teammates.

This like a year ago when people were trying to prove how great "the human highlight film" was. I'm here to tell you he sucked as a team player, clearly. Even the two years when his Hawks were very strong - he let them down by being a selfish PIG.

Go look very carefully at 2007-2008 Celts and tell me how "bad" he was. Yeah right that KG. How come when he gets a great team and good coaching that doesn't count? Even after his prime was over - BAM.

You guys are fueled by hate, not by objectivity or learning. I'd be ashamed of myself if I was doing that.

Jarvo
05-19-2012, 01:46 PM
Everyone hates KG.

I'm a Spurs fan and I like him, Just the **** he does sometimes that makes me dislike him at times.

lakerskbp24
05-19-2012, 01:54 PM
Who doesn't hate Garnett?
This.

BlondeBomber41
05-19-2012, 06:23 PM
Cite your proof, otherwise its just opinion.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/h2h_finder.cgi?request=1&p1=garneke01&p2=duncati01#stats

When did he ever claim that what he was saying was fact? He said "doubtful tbh" which in case you didn't know, means he "doubts" what you are saying. It's not him saying that you're wrong.

As for your statement, I'll go ahead and say it... YOU'RE WRONG. Tim Duncan was always the superior player to Kevin Garnett. He had the ability in a close game to put the team on his shoulders and carry them to victory. Garnett, while a very good offensive player, never consistently did that.

Garnett won a title when he could go to Boston and be the defensive anchor while Pierce and Ray Allen were the #1/#2 options and he had a great PG in Rondo to get him the ball. Duncan on the other hand never had a great distributing PG, and up until 2007 when Tony Parker dominated the playoffs Duncan was always the uncontested #1 option for the Spurs.

Oh, and get out of here with the "Garnett didn't have as good of a team in Minnesota so he got double teamed constantly" excuse. Garnett was the one that crippled that franchise with that gigantic contract. It's not like he himself didn't have say in all of the teams roster moves as well (like most superstars do) so you can't sit there and throw it all on the Wolves management. Garnett was as to blame as anyone.

JayW_1023
05-19-2012, 06:39 PM
Duncan has never missed the playoffs. Or lost a finals.

kdspurman
05-19-2012, 06:46 PM
Duncan has never missed the playoffs. Or lost a finals.

Apparently if you don't use advanced statistics in this thread, your response is pointless.

JayW_1023
05-19-2012, 06:51 PM
Apparently if you don't use advanced statistics in this thread, your response is pointless.

I don't care if you think it's pointless. I rather WATCH the game than tinker with statistics. I love the game for its intangibles. I let other people worry about stats.

BlondeBomber41
05-19-2012, 06:57 PM
]I don't care if you think it's pointless. I rather WATCH the game than tinker with statistics[/B]. I love the game for its intangibles. I let other people worry about stats.

He was being sarcastic Jay :p

JayW_1023
05-19-2012, 07:04 PM
He was being sarcastic Jay :p

I know. But I'm a bit self conscious now that I really don't contribute as much to these forums as I used to.

I used to be a mod at the Spurs forum, waayyyyy back in the day. Strange.

kdspurman
05-19-2012, 07:09 PM
He was being sarcastic Jay :p


I know. But I'm a bit self conscious now that I really don't contribute as much to these forums as I used to.

I used to be a mod at the Spurs forum, waayyyyy back in the day. Strange.

Yea man, I'm on your side here :)

I'm just letting you know, it's what I was going thru in this thread. Cause I agree about watching the game and intangibles and that was my whole argument that I was trying to bring up. But it quickly got shut down by some folks who prefer advanced statistics

BlondeBomber41
05-19-2012, 07:12 PM
I know. But I'm a bit self conscious now that I really don't contribute as much to these forums as I used to.

I used to be a mod at the Spurs forum, waayyyyy back in the day. Strange.

Oh I remember. I remember a time in which it was you and Joshtd and myself alone in the Spurs/Mavericks debates. Feels like just yesterday.

bagwell368
05-19-2012, 08:40 PM
Duncan has never missed the playoffs. Or lost a finals.

Correction. The Spurs have never lost a Finals in Duncan's time - a much different truth.

bagwell368
05-19-2012, 08:49 PM
When did he ever claim that what he was saying was fact? He said "doubtful tbh" which in case you didn't know, means he "doubts" what you are saying. It's not him saying that you're wrong.

Read more of the thread.


As for your statement, I'll go ahead and say it... YOU'RE WRONG. Tim Duncan was always the superior player to Kevin Garnett. He had the ability in a close game to put the team on his shoulders and carry them to victory. Garnett, while a very good offensive player, never consistently did that.

Please consider the difference in the quality of the teams. It's impossible to claim that KG wouldn't do as well or better on SAS with that Coach and that team.


Garnett won a title when he could go to Boston and be the defensive anchor while Pierce and Ray Allen were the #1/#2 options and he had a great PG in Rondo to get him the ball.

Rondo has never been a great PG, and he certainly was not one in 2007-2008. KG was not the the 3rd option either. I mean, did you pay any attention or have your Uncle Ralph give you his ideas on what was going on?


Duncan on the other hand never had a great distributing PG, and up until 2007 when Tony Parker dominated the playoffs Duncan was always the uncontested #1 option for the Spurs.

KG was already past his prime when he got to the Celts and transformed that team. Him. Not career Celtic lazy defender PP, not Ray Allen who was too cool to play D until he got there. Only Larry Bird's rookie year is even close to the same change in Boston since Russell. Since that time KG has generally outplayed TD. KG also outplayed TD at the beginning of his career since TD was still in college, and in several other notable years along the way. Your statements are that of a fan, not an objective observer.


Oh, and get out of here with the "Garnett didn't have as good of a team in Minnesota so he got double teamed constantly" excuse. Garnett was the one that crippled that franchise with that gigantic contract. It's not like he himself didn't have say in all of the teams roster moves as well (like most superstars do) so you can't sit there and throw it all on the Wolves management. Garnett was as to blame as anyone.

Let's see the proof. KG picked the Coach did he? You mean McHale's sidekick was a KG stooge? He has a pretty massive contract in Boston, didn't seem to screw them up too bad.

bagwell368
05-19-2012, 08:52 PM
I don't care if you think it's pointless. I rather WATCH the game than tinker with statistics. I love the game for its intangibles. I let other people worry about stats.

Clearly since you think Rondo is great. I'd wager I've seen 3-8 times more of him than you have and my eyes and the stats say the same thing. Not elite and not great. Not a leader and erratic as hell. I want him out of Boston (for the right deal) after the season, all the better that his trade value has increased lately. Rondo cannot IMO be a #1, #2, or #3 option and the HOF big three he has had to work with are going to disperse, and then what? His FG and FT shooting are going DOWN not up the past two years compared to the prior three years. If you honestly think he can score 22.5 a game with high efficiency - when he will face more D,and less passing options - I have a bridge to sell you.

Rondo is also an emotional nut case, just in the last 15 months he's had major meltdowns which prove he isn't maturing or ready to take on a leadership role in a tough critical city like Boston.

bagwell368
05-19-2012, 09:19 PM
Cause I agree about watching the game and intangibles and that was my whole argument that I was trying to bring up. But it quickly got shut down by some folks who prefer advanced statistics

If your points are good they will stand up on their own.

I never went near advanced stats in hoops until about 4-5 years ago. Basketball stats are not as good as baseball stats in describing what goes on - although they are much better then football.

But just like in baseball, in basketball when you have a deep historical knowledge of the sport, the details of how it is played, and statistics to help explain comparisons between players where you might only see a guy twice a year, or from the past - they come in handy. GM's and scouts use them. So do some announcers and writers.

It's the people on one side or the other that argue against the other that are not bringing any clarity to the debate.

BlondeBomber41
05-19-2012, 09:24 PM
Please consider the difference in the quality of the teams. It's impossible to claim that KG wouldn't do as well or better on SAS with that Coach and that team.

Not impossible, seeing that I just did it. Garnett was never a true #1 option on a championship team like Duncan was. Especially before Parker and Ginobili broke out, Duncan was everything for the Spurs offensively. Garnett was always a very good offensive player but he was never Duncan in his prime good.


Rondo has never been a great PG, and he certainly was not one in 2007-2008. KG was not the the 3rd option either. I mean, did you pay any attention or have your Uncle Ralph give you his ideas on what was going on?

KG was the 2/3 option with Ray Allen. Sometimes 2, sometimes 3. The point is he wasn't counted on to be the #1 guy. Paul Pierce was the clear #1 option for them when they won the title.


KG was already past his prime when he got to the Celts and transformed that team. Him. Not career Celtic lazy defender PP, not Ray Allen who was too cool to play D until he got there. Only Larry Bird's rookie year is even close to the same change in Boston since Russell. Since that time KG has generally outplayed TD. KG also outplayed TD at the beginning of his career since TD was still in college, and in several other notable years along the way. Your statements are that of a fan, not an objective observer.
Your statements are that of a homer, not an objective observer. You aren't gonna be able to use the Kevin Garnett defense argument on me here because Duncan has been locking down the paint for the Spurs for over a decade now. It's not like Duncan is not a fantastic defender in himself. As far as Garnett outplaying Duncan.... No. Garnett could never outplay Dirk Nowitzki, and he didn't outplay Duncan.


Let's see the proof. KG picked the Coach did he? You mean McHale's sidekick was a KG stooge? He has a pretty massive contract in Boston, didn't seem to screw them up too bad.

Garnett got traded to the Celtics with the big contract after they already had a couple other stars. How you can't see the difference between that and signing a ridiculous contract in Minnesota before you build your team is beyond me.

The salary cap in 2003/2004 was 43.8 million and Garnett was taking up 28 million of it! So whose fault is it that he didn't have any help? Much to blame was on Garnett himself for signing such a ridiculous contract.

In comparison, Duncan was making 12.5 million that season. Dirk Nowitzki a little over 11 million. SHAQ in his prime was making 26 million. Jason Kidd in his prime was making 13 million. Iverson in his prime, 13.5 million. Chris Webber was making 16 million.... so don't try and give me a pity party on Garnett not having help. He cared more about the worlds largest contract than winning basketball games.

Gritz
05-19-2012, 09:31 PM
They should squabble

bagwell368
05-19-2012, 10:04 PM
Not impossible, seeing that I just did it. Garnett was never a true #1 option on a championship team like Duncan was. Especially before Parker and Ginobili broke out, Duncan was everything for the Spurs offensively. Garnett was always a very good offensive player but he was never Duncan in his prime good.

You made an assertion based on opinions and emotions. Sorry that doesn't work with me. Crap. According to advanced stats and eye, TD has more peak years (again the team and coach plays a big role), but career wise KG > TD - oh so sorry.


KG was the 2/3 option with Ray Allen. Sometimes 2, sometimes 3. The point is he wasn't counted on to be the #1 guy. Paul Pierce was the clear #1 option for them when they won the title.

Nonsense. KG was the leader of that team, PP was the 2nd banana that made his big splash in the Finals. I can't even believe people in this thread are trying to argue with me about KG in Boston. In the Championship year KG led the team in USG%, #1 in ORtg among starters, 3nd lowest in TOV's on the team, 3rd in AST% right behind PP, 2nd in FG% after Perkins (layups), virtual tie w/ PP in OWS. #1 in WS/48, PER, WS, DWS, DRtg, DRB% - what was that about 2nd or 3rd banana?


Your statements are that of a homer, not an objective observer.

Compared to who, you? Please. No way you have read every entry I have on this thread, don't presume to label me, young man. I'm a Celts fan that is probably more negative on more Celts than anyone else over there. Go check for yourself.


You aren't gonna be able to use the Kevin Garnett defense argument on me here because Duncan has been locking down the paint for the Spurs for over a decade now.

Bias, closed mind. And you call me homer? Look in the mirror.


As far as Garnett outplaying Duncan.... No. Garnett could never outplay Dirk Nowitzki, and he didn't outplay Duncan.

Head to head:

--- Pts -- Reb - Ast - Stl - Blk

KG: 22.9 11.9 - 4.4 - 1.3 - 1.2

DN: 23.1 08.3 - 2.1 - 0.7 - 0.8

I usually think about/check into claims before I make them...tell us more Dr. Science! Notice the massive 0.2 points more per game for DN over KG, make sure you go on a rant over that.


Garnett got traded to the Celtics with the big contract after they already had a couple other stars. How you can't see the difference between that and signing a ridiculous contract in Minnesota before you build your team is beyond me.

How you can't see having a great team and good coach made it easy for KG to have a massive season in his first such opportunity, while TD had the coach and the roster all along is beyond ANYBODY to explain.

So, do you have a family, a mortgage? So you tell me that if you were making $120k, you would turn down $135k because you were not sure if your boss could make the organization work if you got the money? Hahahaha.


The salary cap in 2003/2004 was 43.8 million and Garnett was taking up 28 million of it! So whose fault is it that he didn't have any help? Much to blame was on Garnett himself for signing such a ridiculous contract.

That was one year, but why let facts interfere with your hatchet job, right? He made $16M, $18M in the following two years. Noticed you didn't mention them. - sure - why spoil a good "story"....


In comparison, Duncan was making 12.5 million that season. Dirk Nowitzki a little over 11 million. SHAQ in his prime was making 26 million. Jason Kidd in his prime was making 13 million. Iverson in his prime, 13.5 million. Chris Webber was making 16 million.... so don't try and give me a pity party on Garnett not having help. He cared more about the worlds largest contract than winning basketball games.

Are you a Communist or Socialist? The fact is Garnetts team was crap and 2-3-5-7 million less in a given year wasn't going to change that - but why talk sense when you can just paint everybody anyway you like and claim you are not a fanatic...

So what the market will bear, ever hear that expression? KG got more money and according to advanced stats his career is more valuable then TD's - maybe Minny was just acting like a team in a market with limited resources. But hey, why use common sense if you can rant, right?

BlondeBomber41
05-19-2012, 10:41 PM
You made an assertion based on opinions and emotions. Sorry that doesn't work with me. Crap. According to advanced stats and eye, TD has more peak years (again the team and coach), but career wise KG > TD - oh so sorry.

I made a statement as a basketball fan who has watched Tim Duncan step up and dominate when he needs to the most his entire career. In comparison, Garnett hasn't. The Mavericks were soft as butter in the Nash/Finley/Dirk days and he couldn't even dominate offensively against those teams. Then Sprewell and Cassell came onto his squad and who was it that was taking all the big shots? Sam Cassell.


Nonsense. KG was the leader of that team, PP was the 2nd banana that made his big splash in the Finals.

Leader or not, he still wasn't the first option. Pierce averaged more points, the same amount of shot attempts, and more free throw attempts.

You're right though, Paul Pierce did step it up in the finals. Meanwhile, KG shot 43% and got outscored and outshot by Paul Pierce and Ray Allen. Thank god those guys were there to carry the load.



Compared to who, you? Please. No way you have read every entry I have on this thread, don't presume to label me, young man.

Bias, closed mind. And you call me homer? Look in the mirror.

Homer? I'm a MAVERICKS fan defending a SAN ANTONIO SPUR. You caught me though, I'm a homer. Either that or I actually watch the games and form an opinion based on what I see.



Head to head:

--- Pts -- Reb - Ast - Stl - Blk

KG: 22.9 11.9 - 4.4 - 1.3 - 1.2

DN: 23.1 08.3 - 2.1 - 0.7 - 0.8

I usually think about/check into claims before I make them...tell us more Dr. Science! Notice the massive 0.2 points more per game for DN over KG, make sure you go on a rant over that.

Where are you getting your stats here? The article from this very thread says...

Duncan’s lifetime numbers versus Garnett’s teams, by the way: 19.4 points per game, 11.6 boards and a 44–17 record, including the postseason.



How you can't see having a great team and good coach made it easy for KG to have a massive season in his first such opportunity, while TD had the coach and the roster all along is beyond ANYBODY to explain.

Duncan didn't cripple his franchise financially and is the better player. Notice how the Spurs can put pretty much any sort of supporting cast around Duncan and he contends while it took Paul Pierce and Ray Allen for Garnett to? There is a reason for that.


So, do you have a family, a mortgage? So you tell me that if you were making $120k, you would turn down $135k because you were not sure if your boss could make the organization work if you got the money? Hahahaha.

The NBA isn't real life. NBA players know what it takes available money to acquire talent. The Wolves got so desperate to acquire talent due to the lack of money they tried to cheat with Joe Smith and it cost them 3 first round draft picks. You can't compare real life to the NBA.



That was one year, but why let facts interfere with your hatchet job, right? He made $16M, $18M in the following two years. Noticed you didn't mention them. - sure - why spoil a good "story"....

He went from 22 million, to 25 million, to 28 million, to 16 million, to 18 million, right back to 21 million to 23 million to 25 million. He was getting paid twice what Tim Duncan was getting paid. There is no hatchet job, his contract goes up and down. It's just easiest to make the point when he takes up 28 of the 44 million cap. Doesn't give your team any room to improve their roster. Even his "lesser" years of 16 and 18 million were more than guys like Tim Duncan and Kobe Bryant were getting while winning championships. Absolutely ridiculous.



Are you a Communist or Socialist? The fact is Garnetts team was crap and 2-3-5-7 million less in a given year wasn't going to change that - but why talk sense when you can just paint everybody anyway you like and claim you are not a fanatic...

So what the market will bear, ever hear that expression? KG got more money and according to advanced stats his career is more valuable then TD's - maybe Minny was just acting like a team in a market with limited resources. But hey, why use common sense if you can rant, right?

First of all, you kinda proved everyones point bout advanced stats being stupid with lines like that.

Second, you apparently don't remember what the market was back then. An extra 5 to 7 million could easily mean the difference between Jason Terry or Smush Parker. That money could of been used to resign Chauncey Billups instead of letting him walk to Detroit. It could of been used for alot of things.

If a small market team has limited assets the LAST thing it should do is throw everything they have at ONE player. Just like when the Rangers signed Alex Rodriguez, they were doomed for failure because it handicapped them.

Jumi
05-19-2012, 11:05 PM
I made a statement as a basketball fan who has watched Tim Duncan step up and dominate when he needs to the most his entire career. In comparison, Garnett hasn't. The Mavericks were soft as butter in the Nash/Finley/Dirk days and he couldn't even dominate offensively against those teams. Then Sprewell and Cassell came onto his squad and who was it that was taking all the big shots? Sam Cassell.



Leader or not, he still wasn't the first option. Pierce averaged more points, the same amount of shot attempts, and more free throw attempts.

You're right though, Paul Pierce did step it up in the finals. Meanwhile, KG shot 43% and got outscored and outshot by Paul Pierce and Ray Allen. Thank god those guys were there to carry the load.



Homer? I'm a MAVERICKS fan defending a SAN ANTONIO SPUR. You caught me though, I'm a homer. Either that or I actually watch the games and form an opinion based on what I see.




Where are you getting your stats here? The article from this very thread says...

Duncan’s lifetime numbers versus Garnett’s teams, by the way: 19.4 points per game, 11.6 boards and a 44–17 record, including the postseason.




Duncan didn't cripple his franchise financially and is the better player. Notice how the Spurs can put pretty much any sort of supporting cast around Duncan and he contends while it took Paul Pierce and Ray Allen for Garnett to? There is a reason for that.



The NBA isn't real life. NBA players know what it takes available money to acquire talent. The Wolves got so desperate to acquire talent due to the lack of money they tried to cheat with Joe Smith and it cost them 3 first round draft picks. You can't compare real life to the NBA.




He went from 22 million, to 25 million, to 28 million, to 16 million, to 18 million, right back to 21 million to 23 million to 25 million. He was getting paid twice what Tim Duncan was getting paid. There is no hatchet job, his contract goes up and down. It's just easiest to make the point when he takes up 28 of the 44 million cap. Doesn't give your team any room to improve their roster. Even his "lesser" years of 16 and 18 million were more than guys like Tim Duncan and Kobe Bryant were getting while winning championships. Absolutely ridiculous.




First of all, you kinda proved everyones point bout advanced stats being stupid with lines like that.

Second, you apparently don't remember what the market was back then. An extra 5 to 7 million could easily mean the difference between Jason Terry or Smush Parker. That money could of been used to resign Chauncey Billups instead of letting him walk to Detroit. It could of been used for alot of things.

If a small market team has limited assets the LAST thing it should do is throw everything they have at ONE player. Just like when the Rangers signed Alex Rodriguez, they were doomed for failure because it handicapped them.

this

There is no way to feel sorry for KG not winning in MN with the contracts he had. The league was top heavy with the Spurs, Lakers, Mavs and the Kings! All of those teams had a good big man and pieces around the good big man! He had to take less money if he wanted to compete with those teams. The good FAs went to those teams because they had money. The Wolves didn't have high draft picks because MN always made the playoffs but they weren't a threat for the ship because they were incomplete! Dirk took less money to get Chandler and Duncan took less money on one of his contract because he wanted a legit chance for a title. Whether KG dominates his individual matchup becomes irrelavent when you're trying to win a championship! Amare averaged 37 against Duncan, but Duncan's team won the series!

PhillySportFan
05-20-2012, 12:38 AM
I can see that. Timmy quiet, wins with class. KG loud and rubs it in your face.

whitesoxfan83
05-20-2012, 12:51 AM
Cite your proof, otherwise its just opinion.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/h2h_finder.cgi?request=1&p1=garneke01&p2=duncati01#stats

Says the guy who just claimed Garnett would have as many rings as Duncan if he played for the Spurs... :rolleyes:

Patman
05-20-2012, 03:55 AM
You made an assertion based on opinions and emotions. Sorry that doesn't work with me. Crap. According to advanced stats and eye, TD has more peak years (again the team and coach plays a big role), but career wise KG > TD - oh so sorry.




http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=1&p1=duncati01&y1=2012&p2=garneke01&y2=2012


Timmy has a better PER, TS%, EFg% ORB&, DRB%, TRB%, BLK%. He boasts a higher USG%. His ORTG is only worse by 1. His WS/48 is better. Oh and you don't want to watch the playoff Career numbers.

And over the last 4 Years Duncan had the following USG% 28.5, 26, 22.9, 26.2. Garnett had 23.4, 22.1, 22.3, 24.9. So it's not like Duncan doesn't carry a bigger load, when he's on the floor, then Garnett.

They are both incredible Two way players, They are both All-Time Greats. Their Career Stats are close, but Duncan is the one with more success in the playoffs and he was the bigger inside presence.

JayW_1023
05-20-2012, 04:25 AM
Clearly since you think Rondo is great. I'd wager I've seen 3-8 times more of him than you have and my eyes and the stats say the same thing. Not elite and not great. Not a leader and erratic as hell. I want him out of Boston (for the right deal) after the season, all the better that his trade value has increased lately. Rondo cannot IMO be a #1, #2, or #3 option and the HOF big three he has had to work with are going to disperse, and then what? His FG and FT shooting are going DOWN not up the past two years compared to the prior three years. If you honestly think he can score 22.5 a game with high efficiency - when he will face more D,and less passing options - I have a bridge to sell you.

Rondo is also an emotional nut case, just in the last 15 months he's had major meltdowns which prove he isn't maturing or ready to take on a leadership role in a tough critical city like Boston.

:facepalm: for assuming I care wether or not Rondo can score 22 points per game or not.

You put too much emphasis on scoring. I never claimed Rondo was perfect or the best PG in the game. But when he is on, there is no player I would rather watch. He can dominate without scoring a single point. How many players can say that these days.

His faults are well documented and I agree, but I think his lack of shooting touch makes him a very compelling player. I never claimed him to be the best player or point guard. I'm sick of arguments about 'the best'. So give it a rest, you are trying to argue something with me with no basis of what you think my opinion is.

Rondo just knows the game, he sees the floor, he is unselfish, he defends, he scraps for boards...you can't quantify his impact with just stats. He is an intangibles player.

Swashcuff
05-20-2012, 09:06 AM
KG outplayed every opponent he faced in these series. Okay I'm ready.

I already conceded I was wrong on that one.


KG 0-1.

Question have you gone through the match-ups in this series to correctly ascertain who guarded KG and vice versa?


You said in one of your earlier posts that KG's defense was "that great." Yet Baker was dropping 15-11 on him and shooting almost 60%. That's not outplaying anybody.

KG 0-2.

The same Vin Baker that averaged 19.2 points per game in the regular season? The same Vin Baker that accumulated more points against the Lakers than he did against the Wolves? That Vin Baker? He did indeed have a solid series but when you play with a PG who is attacking the rim like Payton a young KG is going to have a greater defensive role than just to guard Baker. Yet still he was limited despite scoring less than he did against the Lakers and for the regular season.


He did carry them to a win with a triple double. It's a shame that he followed that up with a classic KG 5-20 from the field game to end his season. :)

His 6-20 performance in game 1 might have hurt them too...

Also, he "erased" Sheed. :laugh:

Sheed's stats:
Game 1 - 6 for 10 FG / 3 for 3 FT for 15 points
Game 2 - 3 for 9 FG / 3 for 5 FT for 9 points
Game 3 - 7 for 12 FG / 0 FT for 15 points
Game 4 - 6 for 11 FG / 3 for 4 FT for 15 points.

Overall: 22 for 42 FG (52%FG) for 13.5 PPG. 3 quality starts in 4 games.

Everytime I'm ready to say "agree to disagree" and move on you say something that is just so wrong.

KG 1-3.

Garnett held Sheed to about 76% of what he scored against his other postseason opponents. In other words, he cut their scoring by about 1/4. This is huge, against a player of Sheeds calibre.

Quality starts? I think you're confused this isn't baseball and if you consider Sheed production being limited greatly by KG as compared to when he played against other opponents despite having one of the best all round teams in the league quality then how on earth could KG lose this match-up.

KGs 6-20 losing them the game? Did Dirk's 6-20 lose the Mavs' game? How about Kobe's 6-24? These players did the very same as KG. They didn't have their best offensive performance in terms of scoring but found other ways to help their team win and because they had better supporting casts than KG had their team was able to make up for them not having their best games putting the ball in the basket.


I'm lookin at those Camby numbers and I'm really not impressed. Camby was never a bigtime scorer. I'll give KG the "win" but it's not exactly earth shattering.

KG guarded both Camby and Nene. I couldn't find the splits for both players vs KG but I put Camby's because his was better.


Similar to the Camby. That was the type of player Malone was on the Lakers. He wasn't the 20-10 guy from Utah. They had Shaq and Kobe. Speaking of, Duncan was going toe to toe with Shaq to get past the Lakers. And getting the job done. KG was playing against a past his prime Mailman. I'll give it to him anyway.

KG 5-4.

That season the Lakers beat the Spurs to play the Wolves in the WCF :confused:

Also Malone had a fantastic defensive series against Tim Duncan and was better on the offensive end. The only team that limited Malone more than the Wolves was the Pistons a team who many consider as the greatest defensive team of the era and maybe even of all time.


These are all irrelevant as I said since he went to Boston the label doesn't fit.

KoB have you asked yourself the question why this is the case? Tell me have you done so? How it be irrelevant do you think KG just decided to stop being a "choker" and change his game. NO. It has everything to do with those who were put around him.


You made the claim that KG "outplayed all his opponents." You just proved how wrong that statement was wrong. KG did not outplay Barkley, Baker, Dirk, or Duncan (in the other series).

He was not outplayed by Baker and TD was marginal. That's two at best 3.


The problem with this whole debate is that KG "outplaying" Robert Horry or Marcus Camby doesn't mean he can't be a labelled a choker. It's not like he didn't have all-star teammates.

Two all star teammates in 8 years? That's what you're talking about. Wally and Tom weren't even All Star Calibre players it was because of Kevin Garnett they found themselves in the ASG.


There are plenty of examples of stars winning without all-star teammates yet Garnett really only one had strong post-season run in his whole tenure with the Wolves. He's also the only top 25 player of all-time to miss the playoffs THREE STRAIGHT SEASONS. How can he get a pass on that?

Kareem Abdul Jabbar missed the post season completely during his PRIME. How can you overlook that when you see many making a case for him as a top 3 player of all time.

Again you base your opinion on no context whatsoever completely ignorant strength of conference, supporting cast, coaching, injuries, division. You base your opinion on the outcome and not the reasons for that outcome.


Look at what Kobe did with that Smush-Kwame-Odom-Walton team.
Or LeBron with Snow-Gooden-BigZ
Or Hakeem winning a ring with Vernon Maxwell as his 2nd best teammate.

There is a big difference between Hakeem and KG. Also that Western Conference wasn't as good as the Western Conference KGs. I can guarantee you that if Hakeem had that team in the early 00s there is no way he'd win the west with Maxwell as his 2nd best player.

LeBron played in the east right? He had the best record in the east and also is a better offensive player than KG I don't see the comparison here again.

And Kobe? Serious KoB Kobe? What did Kobe do with that team? They didn't make it pass the first round and Kobe ran threatened the Lakers into making a absolute rape of a deal at the time. KG wasn't that type of player. He was overly loyal and he wasn't the type of person to threaten his franchise. He was content with waiting for a long time. The Kobe argument has no case here.

For his career I don't believe he's a choker. His close out game to beat the Lakers was more than enough proof for me. However, the moniker was appropriate for the start of his career.

For him to be a choker he has to blow every series for 7 years? Your standard for "choker" is so narrow that I'm not sure anyone would fit the criteria. Of course he's going to have a couple triple-doubles and good games. He's a 1st ballot HoFer.

However his propensity for coming up the smallest in the biggest games of the season was shocking.

Look at his shooting performances in season-ending games.

1997 - 7 for 16 FG
1998 - 3 for 11 FG (10 turnovers)
1999 - 6 for 20 FG
2000 - 5 for 20 FG
2001 - 6 for 13 FG
2002 - 9 for 19 FG
2003 - 9 for 21 FG
2004 - 9 for 20 FG (8 turnovers)

He did not shoot 50% in ANY game and had two horrific turnover performances virtually guaranteeing the end of his team's season.

:laugh2: :laugh2: :laugh2:

I LOVE this argument. Let's just take a vague look at the final games of each one of those series instead of what came before right? Or what his opponent did?

Well let me explain to you what took place before.

When facing elimination in 3 games against the Trial Blazers KG had the 2nd of his triple doubles in this series with numbers of 23, 13 and 10 on 11-22 from the field while limited Sheed to 15 on the other end of the floor.

In game 4 of this series when he shot a horrible 5-20 from the field he was missing his second best played for a large chunk of the game due to foul trouble. After playing all 48 minutes and scoring 28 points in game 3 Terrel Brandon found himself in foul trouble early and only played 32 in this one. Of course though when a PF loses his PG that would not affect his team or his play right :rolleyes:. Could you imagine how many doubles KG saw in this one when Brandon wasn't on the floor?

The very next season in a similar scenario against the Spurs he scored 22 points on 7 of 14 shooting while grabbing 8 rebounds and dishing out 4 assists. Do you remember when TD did in that close out game? He had 15 points on 5-12 shooting and turned over the ball 6 times.

In game 7 of the Sacremento 2nd round series the very next season while facing elimination once again do you know what KG did? He had 32 points, 21 rebounds, 4 steals, 5 blocks and shot 12-23 from the field. Do you know what Chris Webber did? He scored 16 points on 8-17 from the field.

Again the next year when KG faced elimination at the hands of the Lakers in game 5 what did KG do? Well he just scored 30 points and grabbed 19 rebounds on 10-23 shooting from the field. 10-23 that's really not impressive right? Well actually it is when you consider the fact that Sam Cassell didn't even play in this game after getting injured earlier in the series. Sam Cassell the same guy who was seen as KGs second best player and closer all season long. It was the 3rd straight game in which Cassell didn't start (Lakers won the previous two and all KG did in those 2 games was averaged 25, 12 and 8) their starter in those 3 games were Darrick Martin. The same Darrick Martin who started a post season game for the first time in his career in that series.

But hey lets ignore all form of context and lets just focus on the outcome. I mean there are no explainable intricacies in the NBA. All that matters is what happened in the end and that's all right?

KoB you ignore any kind of context when saying that KG was a choker. Why wasn't KG a "choker" when Cassell and Sprewell came? Why wasn't he a "choker" when he played with Allen, Pierce and Rondo? You don't just decide to stop being a "choker" you didn't see him as a choker from that point on because he had help and was able to win series as a result.

Tell me something. Out of the first 7 series in which KG lost which one of those do you think KG should have won and cost his team the loss by his choking? I'd love to hear this one.

Swashcuff
05-20-2012, 09:20 AM
this

There is no way to feel sorry for KG not winning in MN with the contracts he had. The league was top heavy with the Spurs, Lakers, Mavs and the Kings! All of those teams had a good big man and pieces around the good big man! He had to take less money if he wanted to compete with those teams. The good FAs went to those teams because they had money. The Wolves didn't have high draft picks because MN always made the playoffs but they weren't a threat for the ship because they were incomplete! Dirk took less money to get Chandler and Duncan took less money on one of his contract because he wanted a legit chance for a title. Whether KG dominates his individual matchup becomes irrelavent when you're trying to win a championship! Amare averaged 37 against Duncan, but Duncan's team won the series!

Has anyone else seen this? This man just blamed KG for not having better supporting casts on the fact that he didn't want to accept a contract cut?

:laugh2: :laugh2: :laugh2:

Dude Minny is a small market team and historically no players wanted to go there. Dirk didn't take less money to get Chandler the Mavs traded for Tyson Chandler. Duncan had the option to opt out of 21.2 million dollars for this season and possibly resign for less in hopes of luring an attractive FA to win a title did he do that? NO. And he was right not to.

This makes absolutely no sense. Kevin Garnett could have signed for 1 mil over 7 years and it still wouldn't attract big name FA. I mean seriously even if Duncan took less money to get the FAs how has that benefited the Spurs? They haven't made a huge FA signing in the greater part of a decade. Same goes for the Mavs? Dirk didn't have to take less money for them to overpay for Dampier and Haywood and had they not overpay for Haywood the Mavs would still have Tyson Chandler.

The argument that Garnett should have taken less money if he wanted a better supporting cast is garbage. If you said that about Kobe it would still be garbage but it would be more viable since he plays for a franchise that a great deal of NBA players have dreamed to play for in arguably the biggest basketball market in the NBA. For Garnett in Minny? :laugh2:

Swashcuff
05-20-2012, 09:58 AM
I made a statement as a basketball fan who has watched Tim Duncan step up and dominate when he needs to the most his entire career. In comparison, Garnett hasn't. The Mavericks were soft as butter in the Nash/Finley/Dirk days and he couldn't even dominate offensively against those teams.

For his career Kevin Garnett has averaged 23, 12.3 and 4.5 against the Mavericks in the regular season and post season combined. Those numbers have only dipped from his younger days against that Dirk, Nash and Finely. To say Garnett didn't dominate against those Mavs is utterly absurd. His team didn't dominate there is a huge difference.


Then Sprewell and Cassell came onto his squad and who was it that was taking all the big shots? Sam Cassell.

How do the names Robert Horry, Manu Ginobili and Tony Parker sound? In different points in their Spurs careers they along with Duncan were the ones taking those big shots but Cassell who has a reputation for being clutch and would be taking the clutch shots for those very Spurs came to the Wolves and was unbelievably clutch that season takes the big Shots for the Wolves and that's a big deal? Seriously?


Leader or not, he still wasn't the first option. Pierce averaged more points, the same amount of shot attempts, and more free throw attempts.

First option or not he was still the team's best player and his role shifted from being a go to scorer to a player who made things easier for everyone else on D so they could focus more on offense.


You're right though, Paul Pierce did step it up in the finals. Meanwhile, KG shot 43% and got outscored and outshot by Paul Pierce and Ray Allen. Thank god those guys were there to carry the load.

Carrying the load? Carrying the load? The Lakers averaged 101 ppg in the regular season and in the playoffs before the finals averaged 105.8 ppg. Do you know how much they averaged against Boston? 93.8. That's 12 less points than they averaged against the West. Do you know who carried that defensive load for Boston? No it wasn't Pierce and it sure as hell wasn't Allen it was KEVIN GARNETT.

Thank God Kevin Garnett was there to change the dynamic of that series defensively or else Paul Piece and Ray Allen would still be ringless.


Duncan’s lifetime numbers versus Garnett’s teams, by the way: 19.4 points per game, 11.6 boards and a 44–17 record, including the postseason.

44 and 17 record? :confused:

When did that happen? Tim Duncan won 29 (23 in the regular season and 6 in the post season) match ups against Kevin Garnett. In one of those post season match ups KG limited him for 18 points per game and in the other he held to to almost 4 points less than he averaged against the rest of the West.

Their head to head match up tally is a TD 29 Wins to KGs 19 Wins.

In their regular season post season combined TD has averaged 20.0 ppg, 12.1 rpg and 3.3 apg with 2.1 BPG on 46.3% FG. Kevin Garnett on the other hand averaged 20.75 ppg, 11.3 rpg and 4.2 apg with 1.9 bpg (this was never KGs forte as compared to Duncan) on 45.5% FG.

So I don't know where you're getting your figures from but they are wrong.


Duncan didn't cripple his franchise financially and is the better player. Notice how the Spurs can put pretty much any sort of supporting cast around Duncan and he contends while it took Paul Pierce and Ray Allen for Garnett to? There is a reason for that.

The NBA isn't real life. NBA players know what it takes available money to acquire talent. The Wolves got so desperate to acquire talent due to the lack of money they tried to cheat with Joe Smith and it cost them 3 first round draft picks. You can't compare real life to the NBA.

:laugh2:

The 4 greatest Spurs in the last 20 years have all been DRAFTED. All they needed to do after that was put the right pieces around those players and they were set. The Spurs has done a better job than damn near any team with getting the most out of their players. Something which you can thank Coach Pop for. This season Boris Diaw came in overweight and fell out of good graces with the worst team in the league. He went to the Spurs and has made a complete 180. Its however not the first time we've seen a player seem to revive his career in SA. As a Mavs fan you should be familiar with Finely doing just this.


He went from 22 million, to 25 million, to 28 million, to 16 million, to 18 million, right back to 21 million to 23 million to 25 million. He was getting paid twice what Tim Duncan was getting paid. There is no hatchet job, his contract goes up and down. It's just easiest to make the point when he takes up 28 of the 44 million cap. Doesn't give your team any room to improve their roster. Even his "lesser" years of 16 and 18 million were more than guys like Tim Duncan and Kobe Bryant were getting while winning championships. Absolutely ridiculous.

So I guess the same should be said about MJ, Shaq, Kobe and every other player who took the max available to them right? This season TD had the option to opt out and possibly re-sign for less why isn't he getting blamed for that?


If a small market team has limited assets the LAST thing it should do is throw everything they have at ONE player. Just like when the Rangers signed Alex Rodriguez, they were doomed for failure because it handicapped them.

We blame Kevin Garnett for this or the team?

KnicksorBust
05-20-2012, 12:00 PM
Admitting? I was writing about that in the past around here. But be careful. I like Duncan's low post game and his effort put in. I find KG's game down low about the equal of Duncan's, but he doesn't spend that much time there. OTOH, from say 13' of the hoop and beyond KG is clearly better then Duncan.

I see that as more a negative for KG than a positive. He's better at a more ineffecient shot so he takes a lot more of them. Duncan is better an effecient shot so he takes more of them. Balance it out and what do you have?


But, I didn't tease out my prior words enough, Duncan and KG are different on offense. I prefer my 4/5's to be great at both, but if they are better at one I like low post rather then high post.

So you prefer Duncan's offensive game than Garnett's.


In say 1999, KG could not guard Centers. Centers are a bit smaller now, now he can. But KG can deal with 3's if he has to, and Duncan AFAIK can only deal with them in the paint.

What a lukewarm compliment. "KG can deal with 3's if he has to." Okay. I agree that KG would do better on a SF than Duncan.

KG is better at shooting deep 2's and iso guarding small forwards. Considering the position they play, there are about 20 other skills that are more important to me than this.


I'm just sorry that two such great players by virtue of the snarky/nasty personality of one can come out looking like a great player and some bum. I would take either one (and yes career wise both are on my all time top 12).

I think you'd be hard-pressed to find a quality poster that actually thinks KG is a bum. He's one of the 15-20 greatest players of all-time. One of the greatest defensive players the game has ever seen. A phenomenal passer for his size. Yet when compared to Duncan (who I see as a top 7 player), I point out the aspects of his game and career which give Duncan a marked advatange.

bagwell368
05-20-2012, 03:50 PM
Says the guy who just claimed Garnett would have as many rings as Duncan if he played for the Spurs... :rolleyes:

With comparison stats from the years that it would be possible/likely that KG would have won on SAS when TD was indisposed by comparison. That was certainly more data then virtually all the haters supplied - but hey? why trouble with data when you can go with popular opinion. How incisive of you...:facepalm:

KnicksorBust
05-20-2012, 04:31 PM
I already conceded I was wrong on that one.


Okay.


Question have you gone through the match-ups in this series to correctly ascertain who guarded KG and vice versa?

Isn't that what you just did?


The same Vin Baker that averaged 19.2 points per game in the regular season? The same Vin Baker that accumulated more points against the Lakers than he did against the Wolves? That Vin Baker? He did indeed have a solid series but when you play with a PG who is attacking the rim like Payton a young KG is going to have a greater defensive role than just to guard Baker. Yet still he was limited despite scoring less than he did against the Lakers and for the regular season.

He was "limited." Seriously? He shot almost 60% from the field. He wasn't limitted, Payton was just their #1 option in that series so Baker's scoring dipped. His effeciency improved. Especially in Minny series.


Garnett held Sheed to about 76% of what he scored against his other postseason opponents. In other words, he cut their scoring by about 1/4. This is huge, against a player of Sheeds calibre. Quality starts? I think you're confused this isn't baseball and if you consider Sheed production being limited greatly by KG as compared to when he played against other opponents despite having one of the best all round teams in the league quality then how on earth could KG lose this match-up.

How do you not backtrack at all from your "Sheed was erased" comment. Now you still say Sheed was "limited greatly" ? Just so we can all understand your basketball terminalogy:

"Limited" = 15 points on 58% from the field.
"Limited Greatly" or "Erased" = 13-14 points on 52% from the field

You and I have very different opinions on what limitting your opponent means.


KGs 6-20 losing them the game? Did Dirk's 6-20 lose the Mavs' game? How about Kobe's 6-24? These players did the very same as KG. They didn't have their best offensive performance in terms of scoring but found other ways to help their team win and because they had better supporting casts than KG had their team was able to make up for them not having their best games putting the ball in the basket.

Your pointing out individual bad games. I was referencing a trend of poor offensive production that was maintained for over half a decade. These are not analogous.


KG guarded both Camby and Nene. I couldn't find the splits for both players vs KG but I put Camby's because his was better.

Camby's production was at or above his normal levels.


That season the Lakers beat the Spurs to play the Wolves in the WCF :confused:

Also Malone had a fantastic defensive series against Tim Duncan and was better on the offensive end. The only team that limited Malone more than the Wolves was the Pistons a team who many consider as the greatest defensive team of the era and maybe even of all time.

The point is simple. KG outplayed a past his prime Malone in a loss. Duncan the year before outplayed an in his prime Shaq and eventually went on to win his 2nd title.


KoB have you asked yourself the question why this is the case? Tell me have you done so? How it be irrelevant do you think KG just decided to stop being a "choker" and change his game. NO. It has everything to do with those who were put around him.

The difference is in Boston he had teammates who could pick up the slack and make us forget about his poor performances. For example Game 7 of the Celtics/Cavs series, with the season on the line, he went 5 for 13 for 13 points. However, Paul Pierce dropped 41 and led the Celtics to the next round. Then KG came back the next game for 26 points 9 rebounds to lead the Celtics to a game 1 win against the Pistons and all was forgiven. His team didn't rely on him in Boston as much as in Minnesota. He could get away with an off game.


He was not outplayed by Baker and TD was marginal. That's two at best 3.

I never said he was. I scored those matchups based on your flawed assumption that "KG outplayed all his opponents." When you look at the Baker and Duncan matchups, that was clearly not the case.


Two all star teammates in 8 years? That's what you're talking about. Wally and Tom weren't even All Star Calibre players it was because of Kevin Garnett they found themselves in the ASG.

Do you realize how many excuses you have to make for him? Two all-star teammates isn't enough for him to win one playoff series? Now the guys that made the all-star team aren't even really all-stars. It's all Garnett. What did he do specifically to make them all-stars? Get them some open shots? They had the talent. Hell, Googs was a solid player pre and post KG.


Kareem Abdul Jabbar missed the post season completely during his PRIME. How can you overlook that when you see many making a case for him as a top 3 player of all time.

Well at that point in his career, Kareem had already won a championship and had 3 league MVPs. So... I'm not sure the resumes compare.


Again you base your opinion on no context whatsoever completely ignorant strength of conference, supporting cast, coaching, injuries, division. You base your opinion on the outcome and not the reasons for that outcome.

You base your opinions off conjecture and excuses. I base mine off facts and results.


There is a big difference between Hakeem and KG.

Yep. One could dominate a playoff series and lead his team to heights beyond its talent. The other is KG. :)


Also that Western Conference wasn't as good as the Western Conference KGs. I can guarantee you that if Hakeem had that team in the early 00s there is no way he'd win the west with Maxwell as his 2nd best player.

And you can prove that how? He beat an underrated Strickland/Porter/ Drexler/Buck Williams Blazers team, then Barkley/KJ Suns, then Malone/Stockton Jazz, followed by dominating Hall of Fame Patrick Ewing in the Finals. That's roughly 5 of the 50 best players of all-time and some multiple all-stars. Are you really diminishing that title run?


LeBron played in the east right? He had the best record in the east and also is a better offensive player than KG I don't see the comparison here again.

LeBron had no help but didn't play like garbage. KG had little help and offensively played like garbage in almost every series before 2003.


And Kobe? Serious KoB Kobe? What did Kobe do with that team? They didn't make it pass the first round and Kobe ran threatened the Lakers into making a absolute rape of a deal at the time. KG wasn't that type of player. He was overly loyal and he wasn't the type of person to threaten his franchise. He was content with waiting for a long time. The Kobe argument has no case here.

Thank you. You made my point for me. You are defining Kobe's success solely on results and outcomes and not looking at context. The same accusations you are throwing at me.

Kobe in 2005: 28ppg/6rpg/5apg with 50/40/77 shooting splits (career high TS% - 59%)
Kobe in 2006: 33ppg/5rpg/4apg with 46/36/92 shooting splits (TS% - 56%)

Despite having a terrible supporting cast. Kobe was still able to produce exceptional numbers that post-season. He was facing just as much pressure and defensive attention (double/triple teams) as any KG ever saw. I could more readily absolve KG of his team's failures if he was playing at a high level. However, as I've previously posted, this was not the case.


:laugh2: :laugh2: :laugh2:

I LOVE this argument. Let's just take a vague look at the final games of each one of those series instead of what came before right? Or what his opponent did?

Well let me explain to you what took place before.

When facing elimination in 3 games against the Trial Blazers KG had the 2nd of his triple doubles in this series with numbers of 23, 13 and 10 on 11-22 from the field while limited Sheed to 15 on the other end of the floor.

In game 4 of this series when he shot a horrible 5-20 from the field he was missing his second best played for a large chunk of the game due to foul trouble. After playing all 48 minutes and scoring 28 points in game 3 Terrel Brandon found himself in foul trouble early and only played 32 in this one. Of course though when a PF loses his PG that would not affect his team or his play right :rolleyes:. Could you imagine how many doubles KG saw in this one when Brandon wasn't on the floor?

Sometimes I'm amazed at how you cling to the smallest things to try and continue the argument. Re-read this paragraph. You're essentially saying "KG may have shot a horrible 5-20 from the field but that's because Terrell Brandon only played 32 minutes." In your effort to prove that Garnett was not poor post-season player at the start of his career, you've resorted to blaming his deficiencies on 7-8 lost minutes of Terrell Brandon because of foul trouble.


The very next season in a similar scenario against the Spurs he scored 22 points on 7 of 14 shooting while grabbing 8 rebounds and dishing out 4 assists. Do you remember when TD did in that close out game? He had 15 points on 5-12 shooting and turned over the ball 6 times.

This is the one aspect of the argument that turns this whole debate into a slam dunk. If you want go toe to toe with legendary playoff performances, Duncan's career will throttle Garnett's. That was the whole point of my initial comment that KG was known as a playoff choker earlier in his career. While Duncan was throwing up 30-20 games and winning titles. Garnett was bombing his way out in the first round.


In game 7 of the Sacremento 2nd round series the very next season while facing elimination once again do you know what KG did? He had 32 points, 21 rebounds, 4 steals, 5 blocks and shot 12-23 from the field. Do you know what Chris Webber did? He scored 16 points on 8-17 from the field.

I do know what KG did in that game. I posted it about 10 pages ago in this very thread. :laugh:


Again the next year when KG faced elimination at the hands of the Lakers in game 5 what did KG do? Well he just scored 30 points and grabbed 19 rebounds on 10-23 shooting from the field. 10-23 that's really not impressive right? Well actually it is when you consider the fact that Sam Cassell didn't even play in this game after getting injured earlier in the series. Sam Cassell the same guy who was seen as KGs second best player and closer all season long. It was the 3rd straight game in which Cassell didn't start (Lakers won the previous two and all KG did in those 2 games was averaged 25, 12 and 8) their starter in those 3 games were Darrick Martin. The same Darrick Martin who started a post season game for the first time in his career in that series.

But hey lets ignore all form of context and lets just focus on the outcome. I mean there are no explainable intricacies in the NBA. All that matters is what happened in the end and that's all right?

KG was phenomenal in that series.


KoB you ignore any kind of context when saying that KG was a choker. Why wasn't KG a "choker" when Cassell and Sprewell came? Why wasn't he a "choker" when he played with Allen, Pierce and Rondo? You don't just decide to stop being a "choker" you didn't see him as a choker from that point on because he had help and was able to win series as a result.

Tell me something. Out of the first 7 series in which KG lost which one of those do you think KG should have won and cost his team the loss by his choking? I'd love to hear this one.

He could have won any of those series if he played to his full potential for 3-4 games. He's one of the greatest players of all-time. Unfortunately he didn't. So they lost. Again. And Again. And Again. For 7 years. The standard for a player of his caliber is different. It's the same reason why people will call LeBron or TMac choke artists despite their absurd production in the playoffs. They set the bar so high that it's damn near impossible to not see at least a small decline. This is why so few all-time greats have improved their numbers in the playoffs.

This does not mean we can just say "everyone gets worse." "He had no help." "Terrell Brandon only played 32 minutes!!!" And act like it's not a big deal. He didn't just get a little worse, he got significantly worse (WS/48, TS%, PER) and has seen one of the top 10 greatest declines in post-season history. This is still the case despite his recent success. That tells how you bad he initially started his career.

http://forums.prosportsdaily.com/showthread.php?t=712733

My question for you is:

What would a player of KG's caliber have to do to be labelled a choker? If 7 seasons of declining numbers, 1st round exits, and horrific close out games isn't enough. I just need to know where you set the barometer because it feels like it'd be impossible for someone to fit the criteria.

bagwell368
05-20-2012, 04:38 PM
I see that as more a negative for KG than a positive. He's better at a more ineffecient shot so he takes a lot more of them. Duncan is better an effecient shot so he takes more of them. Balance it out and what do you have?

Let's see KG had weaker teams hence drew more defensive attention, AND his team needed him to score more. KG with some actual players on his team is anything but a hog. Doc is on him constantly to take more not less shots. Ever get a look at KG's assist numbers? That doesn't look like a pig to me.


So you prefer Duncan's offensive game than Garnett's.

Why must I repeat myself over and over?

As a good and very tough 4/5 in my time (before the 3) I always appreciate guys that play like that.

If I needed an inside guy on offense I'd rather have TD, if I needed an outside guy because I already had a nasty center, I'd take KG's offense.

I believe that the peak of TD's career (say 5 years) he was better then KG (but that's w/o trying to factor in the difference in coaches and team) Much more complex question if you switch teams.

Earlier some poster said KG wouldn't win 4 titles with SAS - only looking at those 4 years in question and assuming KG would post the same exact numbers from Minny on a great team like SAS. Well, it's possible that SAS wins 1 or 2 less in those 4 years, but in all the other years KG has been in the league - including before TD was in the league, and KG's generally better play in his 30's over TD, plus his MVP year and a couple of other notable years, it looks quite possible that KG could have brought SAS 1, 2, or even 3 more titles then TD - in particular as a rookie, and in 2007-2008. So whatever titles were lost could be made up or even bettered. Hmmmm. I still haven't seen anything near a well considered response to that post, just more blah blah blah.

The tell here is that I've been looking at both sides which include where TD is better - and that your side never considers KG could be better, just piles on irrational and blind hate. So, I'm trying to be fair and your side doesn't even care about that. For shame.


What a lukewarm compliment. "KG can deal with 3's if he has to." Okay. I agree that KG would do better on a SF than Duncan.

OK, Duncan is a lumbering clown that could never deal with a #3 unless he was inside of 7 feet of the basket. Happy now? <hint: parody>


KG is better at shooting deep 2's and iso guarding small forwards. Considering the position they play, there are about 20 other skills that are more important to me than this.

I'm sorry, but, to me they don't match in position. TD is a 5/4 and KG is a 4/5. Did I hear you castigating Dirk for being an outside player - much more outside then KG - in particular on defense, but also on offense. Oh I see, it's KG and not Dirk. Yeah, I'm in on the shoot first and ask questions later mentality that pervades this thread. Sure KG is a punk, so what? What are the results? I found Jordan to be a bit of a punk too. Larry Bird was one of the great trash talkers of all time - all to get under the skin of the opponent. Did KG insult you personally? Is it so bad you can't even open your eyes here?


I think you'd be hard-pressed to find a quality poster that actually thinks KG is a bum. He's one of the 15-20 greatest players of all-time. One of the greatest defensive players the game has ever seen. A phenomenal passer for his size. Yet when compared to Duncan (who I see as a top 7 player), I point out the aspects of his game and career which give Duncan a marked advatange.

Even setting aside the teams and coaches, KG and TD are very close. Both put more into D then the O, which I appreciate as a fan. Marked advantage is too strong. TD has an edge in low post D and O. KG has an edge in passing, outside shooting, career longevity, steals, ball handling.

All you have to do is look at 2007-2008 to see what a huge effect KG had on a team and players, and how much greater he played on a great team - and he was in his 13th year at age 31. So he was capable, perhaps back to much earlier in his career of stepping up. TD was of course also 31 that year with two less years of wear and tear on him, and he had his last really good year - but no match for KG's.

In the playoffs in 2007-2008 KG had according to Win Shares that was better then all of Tim Duncan's but one year. All that due to the change in team and coaches. And yet you and others want to scoff at the changes in results if we reverse teams. See. Like I said, most of you guys are altering your arguments to suit your already established opinions.

Pathetic seriously.

KnicksorBust
05-20-2012, 05:22 PM
Let's see KG had weaker teams hence drew more defensive attention, AND his team needed him to score more.

Which has already been proven was too much for him. But has never been proven for Duncan. He won the 2003 title with one of the most underwhelming supporting casts in NBA History.


KG with some actual players on his team is anything but a hog. Doc is on him constantly to take more not less shots. Ever get a look at KG's assist numbers? That doesn't look like a pig to me.

Quote the post where I called him a "pig." My point was clear. His style produces more ineffecient shots. This was especially a hindrance early in his career. This is why his TS% in the postseason is only 52% while Duncan's is 55%. Also I will continue to mention Duncan's propensity to put other teams in the bonus by drawing over 8 FTA per game to KG's 4.5 FTA. The advantages of putting another team in the bonus are multiple. Less minutes for key players for your opponents. More free throw attempts for your teammates. Less aggressive defense by your opponent.


Why must I repeat myself over and over?

As a good and very tough 4/5 in my time (before the 3) I always appreciate guys that play like that.

If I needed an inside guy on offense I'd rather have TD, if I needed an outside guy because I already had a nasty center, I'd take KG's offense.

I believe that the peak of TD's career (say 5 years) he was better then KG (but that's w/o trying to factor in the difference in coaches and team) Much more complex question if you switch teams.

Earlier some poster said KG wouldn't win 4 titles with SAS - only looking at those 4 years in question and assuming KG would post the same exact numbers from Minny on a great team like SAS. Well, it's possible that SAS wins 1 or 2 less in those 4 years, but in all the other years KG has been in the league - including before TD was in the league, and KG's generally better play in his 30's over TD, plus his MVP year and a couple of other notable years, it looks quite possible that KG could have brought SAS 1, 2, or even 3 more titles then TD - in particular as a rookie, and in 2007-2008. So whatever titles were lost could be made up or even bettered. Hmmmm. I still haven't seen anything near a well considered response to that post, just more blah blah blah.

It's pure hypothetical opinion based on no actual analysis. "KG's generally better play..." "quite possible that KG could have..." "whatever titles were lost could be made up..."

Which matchups did Duncan lose that you think KG would have won? Feel free to link me if you have already made this post.


The tell here is that I've been looking at both sides which include where TD is better - and that your side never considers KG could be better, just piles on irrational and blind hate. So, I'm trying to be fair and your side doesn't even care about that. For shame.

Is that really the argument you trying to win? That KG was better than Duncan for some seasons? I have no problem admitting that. However, when you look at their whole careers, I don't think it's close.


OK, Duncan is a lumbering clown that could never deal with a #3 unless he was inside of 7 feet of the basket. Happy now? <hint: parody>
I'm sorry, but, to me they don't match in position. TD is a 5/4 and KG is a 4/5. Did I hear you castigating Dirk for being an outside player - much more outside then KG - in particular on defense, but also on offense. Oh I see, it's KG and not Dirk.

Why would I castigate Dirk for being an outside player when his perimeter game is effecient? It's not the same as KG's fadeaways / deep 2's that prevent him from getting to the foul line. Dirk can hit 3's and get to the basket.

Dirk has a career TS% of 58% in the post-season and averages a ridiculous 8.8 FTA per game while shooting 89% from the free throw line. How is this the same as KG's shooting?


Yeah, I'm in on the shoot first and ask questions later mentality that pervades this thread. Sure KG is a punk, so what? What are the results? I found Jordan to be a bit of a punk too. Larry Bird was one of the great trash talkers of all time - all to get under the skin of the opponent. Did KG insult you personally? Is it so bad you can't even open your eyes here?

Would love to meet him but unfortunatelly haven't gotten the opportunity. I did go to Game 7 of the Celtics/Bulls series at TD Bank Garden a few years back but we didn't cross paths.

Also, I'd love to know what I need to open my eyes to. What irrational KG bashing have I been doing? I acknowledge his greatness without hesitation. That doesn't mean I can't discuss his or any other great players flaws.


Even setting aside the teams and coaches, KG and TD are very close. Both put more into D then the O, which I appreciate as a fan. Marked advantage is too strong. TD has an edge in low post D and O. KG has an edge in passing, outside shooting, career longevity, steals, ball handling.

If we made a checklist of skills. KG might "win" more boxes, but for a 4/5 or a 5/4 aren't low post D and O the two most important qualities?


All you have to do is look at 2007-2008 to see what a huge effect KG had on a team and players, and how much greater he played on a great team - and he was in his 13th year at age 31. So he was capable, perhaps back to much earlier in his career of stepping up. TD was of course also 31 that year with two less years of wear and tear on him, and he had his last really good year - but no match for KG's.

In the playoffs in 2007-2008 KG had according to Win Shares that was better then all of Tim Duncan's but one year. All that due to the change in team and coaches. And yet you and others want to scoff at the changes in results if we reverse teams. See. Like I said, most of you guys are altering your arguments to suit your already established opinions.

So KG had two of the 50 greatest players of all-time as his teammates and he still couldn't top Duncan's greatness. Interesting point. Garnett's Ubuntu season with the Celtics was phenomenal. Let me ask you a question. Do you think Rondo-Ray-Pierce-Duncan would have been able to win a title in any of the last 4 seasons?


Pathetic seriously.

I'll just say this once. If you're going to bait me then I'm done with you.

Swashcuff
05-20-2012, 05:25 PM
Kob seriously just said that The Minnesota Timberwolves of the late 90s early 00s could have beaten Hakeem, Clyde and Chuck, Kobe and Shaq, Duncan's Spurs, Sheed's Blazers and Dirk, Finely and Nash, Payton IF KG had played well to his full potential in 3-4 games in those series.

I honestly don't see any sense carrying on this argument with you KoB. You're one of the most solid posters around here but you have lost all sense of rational thinking with that one. You can't be serious if you mean that. Only two of those teams didn't feature a top 25 player of all time in their prime those teams were the Blazers and the Sonics. Gary Payton is a top 40 player of all time and the Blazers were built very much like the mid 00s Pistons teams.

You're basically saying that a top 15-20 player of all time should be able to carry any team regardless of supporting casts, coaching, system and all other factors to a victory over players who were just as good and better than he was.

I honestly don't see you thinking rationally from here on out after making a statement such as KG could have beat anyone of those teams if he played to his potential in all of those series.

KnicksorBust
05-20-2012, 05:36 PM
If you choose to use pick that one statement out of my post as a reason to give up. I wouldn't blame you at all.

In the NBA anything can happen. Look at the 1984 Sixers:

1983 they won the title. They had Moses Malone, Dr. J, Mo Cheeks, Bobby Jones, and Andrew Toney. They lost to the Nets in the first round.

How bout the Payton-Kobe-Malone-Shaq Lakers that lost to the Pistons? Hall of Famers losing.

Look at the Celtics losing in the Semis the year after they won the chip with Ray-Pierce-KG losing to Dwight Howard and company.

It's ESPECIALLY more likely in those series before it went back to 7 games. He only needed to throw together 3 good games to win some of those series.

Look again at those unbeatable teams you named:

Rockets (didn't win title)
Sonics (didn't win title)
Mavs (didn't win title)
Blazers (didn't win title)

More excuses for KG. I have to repeat myself every time but it's not that KG didn't beat all these teams. It's not even that KG didn't beat ANY of these teams. It's that he played so much worse while playing them that bothered me and that he did it every year for 7 years. And all of his season ending performances were so ineffecient.

Unlike, for example, Kobe who despite having trash teammates and losing in the 1st round, was still a productive player.

Swashcuff
05-20-2012, 05:36 PM
http://forums.prosportsdaily.com/showthread.php?t=712733

Being among the worst in these stats do not mean he's a choker. Lets ask PSK to put Allen Iverson on this list. Anyone calling A.I. a choker in the post season would be a crazy person but he would be in the lower 3rd of that list.


My question for you is:

What would a player of KG's caliber have to do to be labelled a choker? If 7 seasons of declining numbers, 1st round exits, and horrific close out games isn't enough. I just need to know where you set the barometer because it feels like it'd be impossible for someone to fit the criteria.

Basically perform on numerous occasions the way LeBron did last NBA Finals. Especially if he played for a team with a high championship calibre supporting cast.

If KGs production was cut so drastically in every series even to the point where he was outperformed by players who weren't anywhere near his calibre then I'd say he's a royal choke artist but in every single series KG has been in he was a fighter on both ends of the floor and did everything he could to see his team to victory. Was he effective? No did his production dip? Hell yes. But a dip in production on a team like those Wolves is totally understandable.

The vast majority of great NBA players have seen their production decline in the post season. The difference with KG and a lot of those greats however is that KG played on some of the poorest teams during the prime years of his career.

KnicksorBust
05-20-2012, 05:39 PM
Being among the worst in these stats do not mean he's a choker. Lets ask PSK to put Allen Iverson on this list. Anyone calling A.I. a choker in the post season would be a crazy person but he would be in the lower 3rd of that list.



Basically perform on numerous occasions the way LeBron did last NBA Finals. Especially if he played for a team with a high championship calibre supporting cast.

If KGs production was cut so drastically in every series even to the point where he was outperformed by players who weren't anywhere near his calibre then I'd say he's a royal choke artist but in every single series KG has been in he was a fighter on both ends of the floor and did everything he could to see his team to victory. Was he effective? No did his production dip? Hell yes. But a dip in production on a team like those Wolves is totally understandable.

The vast majority of great NBA players have seen their production decline in the post season. The difference with KG and a lot of those greats however is that KG played on some of the poorest teams during the prime years of his career.

Name 3 players you consider playoff chokers.

Swashcuff
05-20-2012, 06:04 PM
If you choose to use pick that one statement out of my post as a reason to give up. I wouldn't blame you at all.

No giving up dude. Realizing that this is not a debate either of us is going to win. You lost all sense of rational thinking with that statement.


In the NBA anything can happen.

Anything can happen dude. That doesn't mean anything will happen.


Look at the 1984 Sixers:

1983 they won the title. They had Moses Malone, Dr. J, Mo Cheeks, Bobby Jones, and Andrew Toney. They lost to the Nets in the first round.

How bout the Payton-Kobe-Malone-Shaq Lakers that lost to the Pistons? Hall of Famers losing.

Dude you're giving me two examples to back the statement of saying "anything can happen". You're better than that.

You just backed your argument as to why KG should have won with anything can happen. That's the best analysis you could have done?


Look at the Celtics losing in the Semis the year after they won the chip with Ray-Pierce-KG losing to Dwight Howard and company.

You do realize KG was out that post season right? You do realize he was the catalyst to that team, their best player and the #1 reason they were the NBA champions.

If anything this argument should bolster my argument. None of the teams KG faced lost their best player for the series in whcih he played. Matter of a fact in each one of those series KG played that he was unable ton get out of the first round each of the teams had their best 2-3 players on hand. Same can't be said for KG.


It's ESPECIALLY more likely in those series before it went back to 7 games. He only needed to throw together 3 good games to win some of those series.

So why mention the 76ers?


Look again at those unbeatable teams you named:

Rockets (didn't win title)
Sonics (didn't win title)
Mavs (didn't win title)
Blazers (didn't win title)

Who called those teams unbeatable? I said its not rational expect KG to beat those teams if you're going to say a top 15 player should win despite being a top 15 player.

The Rockets weren't far removed from winning the title and still had Hakeem, Clyde and Chuck who were all near the end of their prime. You really expect a top 15 player (as of today) in the 2nd season of his career to overcome that?

The Sonics won 61 games that season finishing as a top 3 team out West (the west was extremely top heavy) and their coach won the coach of the year.

The Mavs had a team led by Dirk and Steve Nash 2 top 40 players in league history and were better coached.

The Trail Blazers would be the most logical team in this scenario and IF you said just them I'd say you had a point.


More excuses for KG. I have to repeat myself every time but it's not that KG didn't beat all these teams. It's not even that KG didn't beat ANY of these teams. It's that he played so much worse while playing them that bothered me and that he did it every year for 7 years. And all of his season ending performances were so ineffecient.

:laugh2:

I'm not even going back there with you because your idea of playing worse if VERY narrow and you have yet to see the bigger picture on both ends of the floor.

You hear what you said how KG didn't beat those TEAMS not the Wolves.


Unlike, for example, Kobe who despite having trash teammates and losing in the 1st round, was still a productive player.

Thanks again for bolstering my argument. Kobe Bryant met and exceeded his potential in those very games but guess what. His team still wasn't able to get out of the first round JUST like KGs teams. You thought though that if KG played he would have pushed his team over better teams than the one Kobe in 06.

:pity:

Chronz
05-20-2012, 06:13 PM
Im more interested in 3 players you (Swash) consideres playoff risers

KnicksorBust
05-20-2012, 08:26 PM
Being among the worst in these stats do not mean he's a choker. Lets ask PSK to put Allen Iverson on this list. Anyone calling A.I. a choker in the post season would be a crazy person but he would be in the lower 3rd of that list.



Basically perform on numerous occasions the way LeBron did last NBA Finals. Especially if he played for a team with a high championship calibre supporting cast.

If KGs production was cut so drastically in every series even to the point where he was outperformed by players who weren't anywhere near his calibre then I'd say he's a royal choke artist but in every single series KG has been in he was a fighter on both ends of the floor and did everything he could to see his team to victory. Was he effective? No did his production dip? Hell yes. But a dip in production on a team like those Wolves is totally understandable.

The vast majority of great NBA players have seen their production decline in the post season. The difference with KG and a lot of those greats however is that KG played on some of the poorest teams during the prime years of his career.

:laugh: You admit that for 7 seasons he wasn't effective and "hell yes" his production dipped but referring to that as "choking" is not appropriate? We'll just have to agree to disagree at this point.


No giving up dude. Realizing that this is not a debate either of us is going to win. You lost all sense of rational thinking with that statement.

Clearly you are. I shredded your post with another 20 comments and you used one statement to completely ignore the rest of my post. :cool: You say "KG outplayed every player in his series." I prove you wrong. You say "KG erased Rasheed Wallace." I prove you wrong. You say "KG was not a choker" yet I get you to finally admit KG was ineffective and had a significant dip in production.


Anything can happen dude. That doesn't mean anything will happen.

Dude you're giving me two examples to back the statement of saying "anything can happen". You're better than that.

I rattled off multiple before I went out to dinner. Do you honestly think KG winning some of those matchups in a 5 game series would have qualified for biggest shocker in NBA History? Some years his chances were significantly better than others but it didn't matter because KG at that point wasn't going to lead his teams anywhere.


You just backed your argument as to why KG should have won with anything can happen. That's the best analysis you could have done?

No I gave examples. We just went over this.


You do realize KG was out that post season right? You do realize he was the catalyst to that team, their best player and the #1 reason they were the NBA champions.

If anything this argument should bolster my argument. None of the teams KG faced lost their best player for the series in whcih he played. Matter of a fact in each one of those series KG played that he was unable ton get out of the first round each of the teams had their best 2-3 players on hand. Same can't be said for KG.


So why mention the 76ers?

The Sixers roster was stacked and the defending champs. Nobody would have given those Nets teams a chance. Just like (ironically) you are now giving Garnett no chance to win these matchups. It's humorous to me that the person defending KG is the same person that claims it would be impossible for him to win some of those series. I don't like talk in absolutes like that.



Who called those teams unbeatable? I said its not rational expect KG to beat those teams if you're going to say a top 15 player should win despite being a top 15 player.

The Rockets weren't far removed from winning the title and still had Hakeem, Clyde and Chuck who were all near the end of their prime. You really expect a top 15 player (as of today) in the 2nd season of his career to overcome that?

The Sonics won 61 games that season finishing as a top 3 team out West (the west was extremely top heavy) and their coach won the coach of the year.

The Mavs had a team led by Dirk and Steve Nash 2 top 40 players in league history and were better coached.

The Trail Blazers would be the most logical team in this scenario and IF you said just them I'd say you had a point.

Debating the merits of those teams is irrelevant. You're becoming increasingly dense in this conversation as you continuously lose track of my point and create your own discussion.


I'm not even going back there with you because your idea of playing worse if VERY narrow and you have yet to see the bigger picture on both ends of the floor.

You hear what you said how KG didn't beat those TEAMS not the Wolves.

It's amazing that you're the one who brought all the numbers into this and you still don't see the big picture. Offensively you concede he was ineffective. Defensively, we've seen Barkley-Baker-Sheed-Duncan-Dirk and Camby all have effecient scoring series against him. Horry-Duncan (the earliest series)-Malone are the only players who seemed to have performed ineffeciently. What am I missing by being so narrow?


Thanks again for bolstering my argument. Kobe Bryant met and exceeded his potential in those very games but guess what. His team still wasn't able to get out of the first round JUST like KGs teams. You thought though that if KG played he would have pushed his team over better teams than the one Kobe in 06.

That's because KG had more help than Kobe. The Kobe Post-Shaq/Pre-Gasol playoffs were to prove that a player could still excel with little to no help from his teammates. KG's teams losing and his poor production is the difference.

Swashcuff
05-20-2012, 09:10 PM
:laugh: You admit that for 7 seasons he wasn't effective and "hell yes" his production dipped but referring to that as "choking" is not appropriate? We'll just have to agree to disagree at this point.

So a player fails to take upset his underdog team and he's a choker?


Clearly you are. I shredded your post with another 20 comments and you used one statement to completely ignore the rest of my post. :cool: You say "KG outplayed every player in his series." I prove you wrong. You say "KG erased Rasheed Wallace." I prove you wrong. You say "KG was not a choker" yet I get you to finally admit KG was ineffective and had a significant dip in production.

:laugh2:

You did what? :laugh2:

Dude I've been saying from the very outset in this thread that KG has had a dip in production. Damn near every player in NBA history has had a dip in the post season. It's only logical what are you talking about?


I rattled off multiple before I went out to dinner. Do you honestly think KG winning some of those matchups in a 5 game series would have qualified for biggest shocker in NBA History? Some years his chances were significantly better than others but it didn't matter because KG at that point wasn't going to lead his teams anywhere.

No I gave examples. We just went over this.

KoB your argument is anything can happen. Anytime someone attempts to make an argument based on anything can happen that's a baseless one.

That's not giving examples that nitpicking individual occasions where teams pulled off an upset. Can it happen YES. Does that mean it will? No.

That is one of the most baseless points I've seen anyone make in this entire thread. Before you actually make a break down of KGs opponents and dissect exactly what would have put KG's teams over the hump against those rosters and why you say anything can happen. Seriously. :rolleyes:


The Sixers roster was stacked and the defending champs. Nobody would have given those Nets teams a chance. Just like (ironically) you are now giving Garnett no chance to win these matchups. It's humorous to me that the person defending KG is the same person that claims it would be impossible for him to win some of those series. I don't like talk in absolutes like that.

Again what is the relevance to this very scenario. Does the 76ers losing give the Wolves the right to win. This is the most baseless argument ever. This is not an example of why they Wolves should win this is a classic example of a poster basically having no other logical reasoning and reaching.

I could reach for the thousands of other occasions in which heavily favoured teams were able to win the games they were suppose to win against weaker teams. Your argument is baseless.


Debating the merits of those teams is irrelevant. You're becoming increasingly dense in this conversation as you continuously lose track of my point and create your own discussion.

This is why you have no argument here. You apply not a single aspect of context to your argument then return with an argument of "Anything Can Happen":laugh2:


It's amazing that you're the one who brought all the numbers into this and you still don't see the big picture. Offensively you concede he was ineffective. Defensively, we've seen Barkley-Baker-Sheed-Duncan-Dirk and Camby all have effecient scoring series against him. Horry-Duncan (the earliest series)-Malone are the only players who seemed to have performed ineffeciently. What am I missing by being so narrow?

The bigger picture? Saying KG lost and not his team lost is seeing the bigger picture? All you have done in this entire thread was look at the end of result instead of even giving yourself a chance to understand exactly how a player produce. You see a player scoring efficiently and say that he was good against KG without taking into consideration the fact that the player's volume was much lower than against any other opponent in the post season as well as their regular season #s. But hey he made 6-11 from the field so the fact that he couldn't score more than 15 against KG matters not even though he was scoring 20+ on a regular with the same efficiency against other PFs.


That's because KG had more help than Kobe. The Kobe Post-Shaq/Pre-Gasol playoffs were to prove that a player could still excel with little to no help from his teammates. KG's teams losing and his poor production is the difference.

So Googs misses the entire 2nd half of the season and the playoffs in 98 gave Garnett the better supporting cast? Interesting. That cast was a wash with Kobe's at best.

As usual you ignore context and go with blanket statements. No attempt to make an assessment of each circumstance but rather you see the end result and you say KGs a choker.

What makes me laugh is you saying KG produced poorly.

Between the 96-97 NBA season Kevin Garnett averaged 21.3 ppg, 11.4 rpg and 4.8 apg in the regular season. During that same time span in the post season 22.3 ppg, 13.4 rpg and 5 apg. He saw a dip in his TS%, maintained the same PER but where he got hurt was his WS/48 just as most superstar have.

But hey he produced poorly.

bagwell368
05-20-2012, 09:10 PM
So KG had two of the 50 greatest players of all-time as his teammates and he still couldn't top Duncan's greatness. Interesting point. Garnett's Ubuntu season with the Celtics was phenomenal. Let me ask you a question. Do you think Rondo-Ray-Pierce-Duncan would have been able to win a title in any of the last 4 seasons?

Sorry, TD barely topped him when he was young in ONE year, and KG as a post peak player did that, on a new team, new coaches and players - BAM. If you think that isn't a huge win for KG over people who labeled him from his Minny days, and suggested what might have been if he had been on SAS, then clearly your agenda is showing.



I'll just say this once. If you're going to bait me then I'm done with you.

Bait? Far too sensitive, and I conduct my business my way, not the other way round.

Swashcuff
05-20-2012, 09:12 PM
Im more interested in 3 players you (Swash) consideres playoff risers

MJ and Hakeem would be at the top of the list no doubt. As for the 3rd it could be somewhere between Russell, Walt Frazier and maybe Magic. I'd lean to Russell on that one however.