# Chris Webber (Prime) vs. Kevin Garnett (Prime)



## Skeet Skeet Skita (Dec 11, 2005)

Which player would you consider better in their prime ?

Just some infos about the players:

Best statistical season:

KG: 24.2 ppg, 13.9 rpg, 5 apg, 2.17 bpg and 50 % FG

Webber: 27.1 ppg, 11.1 rpg, 4.2 apg, 1.69 bpg and 48 % FG

Awards:

KG: MVP 1x, Allstar 8x, All-NBA 1st team 3x, All-NBA 2nd team 3x, All-NBA 3rd team 1x, All Defensive team 6x

Webber: All-NBA 1st team 1x, All-NBA 2nd team 2x, Allstar 5x, Rookie of the year 94

Achievements:

KG: Western Conference Finals, Best season 58-24

Webber: Western Conference Finals, Best season 61-21

...


----------



## cambyblockingyou (Nov 26, 2005)

garnett, period.


----------



## Rednecksbasketball (Dec 18, 2003)

yeah Id go with KG. KG has always had the Wolves at the high level of play. Webber teams on the other hand have just been bad. look at all those seasons in Washington.


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

About the same IMO.


----------



## PHXSPORTS4LIFE (May 8, 2003)

i'd like to see derrick coleman's prime thrown in there too.


----------



## SeaNet (Nov 18, 2004)

Are you talking talent, or reliable impact on the game night after night, season after season? If its talent, sure Webber in his physical prime was the perfect PF. But when it comes to reliability, there is no comparison. KG all the way. He made 20 win teams 50 win teams for years.


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

SeaNet said:


> Are you talking talent, or reliable impact on the game night after night, season after season? If its talent, sure Webber in his physical prime was the perfect PF. But when it comes to reliability, there is no comparison. KG all the way. *He made 20 win teams 50 win teams for years.*


WTF?

The difference between Webber and Garnett is KG is a media darling and Webber is not...period.


----------



## cambyblockingyou (Nov 26, 2005)

MemphisX said:


> WTF?
> 
> The difference between Webber and Garnett is KG is a media darling and Webber is not...period.


No, it's that Webber has repeatedly failed with good talent beside him while Garnett seized the one of 2 moments he had and rode it as far as possible.


----------



## SeaNet (Nov 18, 2004)

MemphisX said:


> WTF?
> 
> The difference between Webber and Garnett is KG is a media darling and Webber is not...period.


You are entitled to your opinion, but I couldn't possibly disagree more.


----------



## DuMa (Dec 25, 2004)

why are we talking as if KG is out of his prime. he is still in his prime yo!


----------



## P-Dub34 (May 19, 2005)

All I can say is that prime C-Webb was just nasty. Absolutely nasty.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Its hard to choose between the two. C-Webb was just a joy to watch, injuries robbed what could have been. Kg gets the nod because of the reliability factor


----------



## Vinsane (Feb 27, 2005)

Chris Webber


----------



## Nikos (Jun 5, 2002)

Kg.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Even. Stats dont mean everything. Webber has been the main guy in some big post season runs, while KG has KG'ed it up post season after post season. 



*R-Star's Basketball Dictionary Vol IIII *

*(KG'ing it up)-* To get great stats but have nothing to show for it. Also see * went big, still went home*, comparison *Karl Malone, Charles Barkley*


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

Webber was a beast in his Warrior/King days up until 2003. He was a better scorer in his prime and a better passer in his prime than KG (he's still a great passer, but doesn't have the quickness to make certain passes nowadays). However, KG's combined advantage defensively and in terms of consistency and durability is so large it's not even worth debating. KG without much hesitation.


----------



## Drk Element (Nov 10, 2004)

R-Star said:


> Even. Stats dont mean everything. Webber has been the main guy in some big post season runs, while KG has KG'ed it up post season after post season.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


ditto, even steven


----------



## Cap (Nov 5, 2003)

And the team success argument doesn't work. What did Webber do on those Kings teams that was so fantastic? Got to the WCF once? So did KG.


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

R-Star said:


> Even. Stats dont mean everything. Webber has been the main guy in some big post season runs, while KG has KG'ed it up post season after post season.


You started well, Mountie, but then you stunk up the place:



> *R-Star's Basketball Dictionary Vol IIII *
> 
> *(KG'ing it up)-* To get great stats but have nothing to show for it. Also see * went big, still went home*, comparison *Karl Malone, Charles Barkley*


Malone went to 2 Nba Finals. KG still has wet dreams about going to one.
Chuck was a monster. He carried TWO franchises in his back to playoff runs. And he made the Finals.

You want a KG comparison? Think T-Mac.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

PauloCatarino said:


> You started well, Mountie, but then you stunk up the place:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Just compared big men without rings. Webber has fallen into obscurity. Unless KG gets a ring, he'll be remembered along with Chuck and Karl as one of those HOF big mean who never got the hardware. I dont think Webber will be remembered like that for some reason, people seem to forget the guy actualy used to be a great player.


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

R-Star said:


> Just compared big men without rings. Webber has fallen into obscurity. Unless KG gets a ring, he'll be remembered along with Chuck and Karl as one of those HOF big mean who never got the hardware. I dont think Webber will be remembered like that for some reason, people seem to forget the guy actualy used to be a great player.


_Sheila: Times have changed
Our kids are getting worse
They won't obey their parents
They just want to fart and curse!
Sharon: Should we blame the government?
Liane: Or blame society?
Dads: Or should we blame the images on TV?
Sheila: No, blame Canada
Everyone: Blame Canada
Sheila: With all their beady little eyes
And flappin' heads so full of lies
Everyone: Blame Canada
Blame Canada
Sheila: We need to form a full assault
Everyone: It's Canada's fault!
Sharon: Don't blame me
For my son Stan
He saw the darn cartoon
And now he's off to join the Klan!
Liane: And my boy Eric once
Had my picture on his shelf
But now when I see him he tells me to **** myself!
Sheila: Well, blame Canada
Everyone: Blame Canada
Sheila: It seems that everything's gone wrong
Since Canada came along
Everyone: Blame Canada
Blame Canada
Copy Guy: They're not even a real country anyway
Ms. McCormick: My son could've been a doctor or a lawyer rich and true,
Instead he burned up like a piggy on the barbecue
Everyone: Should we blame the matches?
Should we blame the fire?
Or the doctors who allowed him to expire?
Sheila: Heck no!
Everyone: Blame Canada
Blame Canada
Sheila: With all their hockey hullabaloo
Liane: And that ***** Anne Murray too
Everyone: Blame Canada
Shame on Canada
For...
The smut we must stop
The trash we must bash
The Laughter and fun
Must all be undone
We must blame them and cause a fuss_


----------



## Samael (Sep 1, 2005)

I don't want to rely on stats to much to make an argument here but they are both great players. 20-10-5 caliber players, although weber is just a borederline 20-10-5 guy more of a 20-10-4 guy really. 

But KG has the longest consecutive 20-10-5 seasons in the NBA; 6 in fact. It will eventually be 7 cause he is just averaging 4.9 assists at the moment but it will eventually go up to 5 by the end of the season. 

But stats that KG pt up in the 02-03 season has never been done by any PF in NBA history.


----------



## Phenom Z28 (Nov 22, 2004)

Even.

Both players have had relatively similar careers with the exception of injuries in Webber. They've both proven themselves as consistent and reliable post/wing players but have also proven they are incapable of leading their team to the highest level. They're the "cake" guys and need somebody to apply the frosting


----------



## Whack Arnolds (Dec 5, 2005)

Chris Webber.


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

I was never a fan of Webber. Give me Garnett.


----------



## fobbie (Dec 26, 2005)

they're both even IMO, unless one of them win a ring


----------



## edabomb (Feb 12, 2005)

I voted CWebb. My head tells me KG has had a far more consistent career. But CWebb in his prime at Sacramento was just so fun to watch I can't go past him, easily the most entertaining power forward of the past decade IMO(given Kemps highlight days were over post 1996).


----------



## ralaw (Feb 24, 2005)

It's a matter of preference, neither distinguished himself to be definitely better.


----------



## KoBe & BeN GoRdOn! (Aug 4, 2005)

kg


----------



## Jesus El Monkzoid (Jan 7, 2006)

KG's superior defense bumps him slightly ahead of Webber I.M.O.

I think Webber was a better all-around scorer, and a slightly better passer though.


----------



## Vintage (Nov 8, 2002)

KG is a soldjha.


----------



## Gilgamesh (Dec 23, 2005)

Are people forgetting defense.

They maybe similar on offense in their primes but KG is by far the better defensive player.

I take KG anyday. Put KG on those talented Kings and they would probably make the Finals. 

KG dreams to have the type of teammates Webber has had.


----------



## f22egl (Jun 3, 2004)

Gilgamesh said:


> Are people forgetting defense.
> 
> They maybe similar on offense in their primes but KG is by far the better defensive player.
> 
> ...


 Everyone forgets how badly officiated the Lakers/Kings series was. Mike Bibby was elbowed in the face by Kobe Bryant and they called a foul on Bibby... go figure.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Gilgamesh said:


> Are people forgetting defense.
> 
> They maybe similar on offense in their primes but KG is by far the better defensive player.
> 
> ...


I have to disagree on that one. Those Kings teams were tailor made for Webber, they are still reeling after they dealt Webber. Kg can pass, but Webber is the better passer which was very vital on those teams


----------



## JuX (Oct 11, 2005)

Garnett


----------



## SeaNet (Nov 18, 2004)

Gilgamesh said:


> Are people forgetting defense.
> 
> They maybe similar on offense in their primes but KG is by far the better defensive player.
> 
> ...


Exactly. Vlade, Bibby, Peja, Bobby Jackson, Christie.


----------



## Sammysummer (Jan 6, 2006)

I'm voting Garnett too.


----------



## The Mad Viking (Jun 12, 2003)

My initial reaction was a slight edge to KG, and that is born out by a detailed statistical analysis.

I was surprised it took to the bottom of page 2 for KGs defensive edge to be mentioned. To me, that is the biggest difference. KG is an outstanding defensive player. It's not fair to compare that to C-Webb today, but even in his prime nobody claimed that C-Webb was a primo defender. Probably a little above average. Dan Rosenbaum's adjusted plus minus systems have Garnett as the #2 PF defensively last year, and the #5 defensive player in the NBA for the combined seasons of 02-03 and 03-04.

On offense, C-Webb scored a little more, based on taking 2 more FGA per game. Their FG% and 3G% are virtually identical, but KG's FT% is clearly better, 77% vs. 64%. C-Webb over his career took and made nearly twice as many treys per game, but that was not beneficial, as both players hit just 30%, nor is it particulary indicative, as most of Webber's treys were shot in over a couple of anomylous seasons in Golden State.

Rebounding KG has a clear edge; Webber was a beast on the offensive glass his first two seasons in the NBA, grabbing 4 o-boards per game. Since then, its all KG. Webber had one outstanding season, the strike year, of 13rpg; and 5 years of 10 -11 rebs, with half his seasons below 10. KG has 3 seasons better than 13 and seven consecutive years of at least 11 rpg. (ever since he was 23)

There is no evidence to support the constant assertions that C-Webb is a better passer. Oer their careers both averaged 4.5 apg. But this belies the fact that C-Webb only once managed over 5 apg, whereas KG has a running streak of 6 seasons of AT LEAST 5 apg. KGs career average is distorted because as a 19 year-old rookie he averaged just 1.8 apg. C-Webb's assist/turnover ratio is worse, 1.53, KG is at 1.74. (13% more turnovers by C-Webb.)

Blocks and steals are even. C-Webb 7% more steals, KG 9% more blocks.

C-Webb, however, committed a whopping 33% more fouls per game than KG. A rather high career average of 3.4 per game, vs. KGs modest 2.5 per game.

There simply is no case for C-Webb being as good as KG. 

Even if you throw out the fact that KG has missed 11 games in his 10 seasons and C-Webb has averaged 22 games missed lost per season!


----------



## Adol (Nov 25, 2004)

I kind of see this debate a lot like the KG vs Duncan debate. The majority seem to favor Duncan, but KG is really damn close, with some favoring KG. It's certainly debatable. Well this is the same thing, only with KG in the place of Duncan now and C-Web in KG's place.

Gimme KG.


----------



## JT (Mar 1, 2004)

> There is no evidence to support the constant assertions that C-Webb is a better passer. Oer their careers both averaged 4.5 apg. But this belies the fact that C-Webb only once managed over 5 apg, whereas KG has a running streak of 6 seasons of AT LEAST 5 apg.


No offense but one can't rely on statistics to bear out better passing. Like defense, and clutch play it only can be discovered through watching the games. For example, Kobe Bryant this year is averaging 4.4 and statistically it is equal or better than some of CWebb's seasons, but firsthand I'll tell you that CWebb is the better passer hands down. Read this post for a more detailed explanation on the matter.

http://www.basketballboards.net/forum/showpost.php?p=2683067&postcount=35


----------



## SeaNet (Nov 18, 2004)

sherako said:


> No offense but one can't rely on statistics to bear out better passing. Like defense, and clutch play it only can be discovered through watching the games. For example, Kobe Bryant this year is averaging 4.4 and statistically it is equal or better than some of CWebb's seasons, but firsthand I'll tell you that CWebb is the better passer hands down. Read this post for a more detailed explanation on the matter.
> 
> http://www.basketballboards.net/forum/showpost.php?p=2683067&postcount=35


I would certainly have to agree on passing and assists. So much more goes into it. Look at those Kings teams... they had Vlade, Brad Miller (season or so together w/ CWebb), Mike Bibby. Lots of great passers, and lots of sharing of the ball. That's going to drive individual assist numbers down. Doesn't mean the passing is worse at all. CWebb, for all his flaws, has always been among the best passing big men to ever step on the court.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

I think Webber's talent and ability is underrated...in his prime, he was one of the most versatile (defense aside) big men of all-time and a first option scorer. And his defense wasn't terrible. He's arguably the best passing big man ever (Bill Walton and Arvydas Sabonis were also amazing).

That said, I still think Garnett wins this easily. Garnett is also one of the most versatile big men ever, a first-option scorer _and_ one of the great defensive big men ever. The only knock against Garnett is that he is, at times, too passive...but the same criticism can be leveled at Webber. Garnett has absolutely no other weaknesses.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

MemphisX said:


> WTF?
> 
> The difference between Webber and Garnett is KG is a media darling and Webber is not...period.


You mean perenial all interview first team member Webber?


----------



## Skeet Skeet Skita (Dec 11, 2005)

Jamel Irief said:


> You mean perenial all interview first team member Webber?


If you think that being frequently interviewed equals being a media darling then you sir are a stupid person.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

Skeet Skeet Skita said:


> If you think that being frequently interviewed equals being a media darling then you sir are a stupid person.


Oh the irony...

The all interview team is a team voted by the MEDIA about who their favorite players to interview are. John Amaechi made it one year.

If you are this ignorant on a subject you shouldn't throw insults around.


----------



## digital jello (Jan 10, 2003)

Even.

Garnett plays in the Shaq/Kobe, Detroit, Duncan's Spurs era.

Webber's Kings had the chance when Shaq and Kobe were running things.

Great players. Unfortunately for them, bad timing.


----------



## tdk1984 (May 9, 2005)

KG. Not even close.


----------



## Prolific Scorer (Dec 16, 2005)

Webber was nasty in his prime, but he never was better than KG at any point of his career....

Yeah, Webber's stats are out the roof...but IMO stats are kind of overrated to me when picking the better player.

I just look at talent, and who's the better player on the court, and KG was always more versitile than Cwebb.


----------



## dwade3 (Sep 12, 2005)

Jesus El Monkzoid said:


> KG's superior defense bumps him slightly ahead of Webber I.M.O.
> 
> I think Webber was a better all-around scorer, and a slightly better passer though.


pretty much wat this guy says, Webber could sometimes pass the ball like a frigggin point guard...KG's all round game and the fact that Webber has had great players along side him in Sactown makes KG's cause all the more better, but if u take the PRIME year, you would have to say its almost even, but KG's pips him becoz of the All Defensive team...


----------



## GTA Addict (Jun 27, 2005)

dwade3 said:


> but if u take the PRIME year, you would have to say its almost even, but KG's pips him becoz of the All Defensive team...


IMO, if you take KG's prime year ('03-04) and compare it to any other PF in history, KG wins. Statistically, it's the best season ever produced by a PF.

KG over Webber, pretty easily, IMO.


----------

