# Kevin Garnett is the best PF of all time.



## CelticsMan (Aug 28, 2015)

We're talking peak here, and at his peak, Garnett on any given night could drop 25 and 15 along with 8-10 assists. He could defend every position effectively, had ran the point at times, had a great mid range shot and a decent three point shot. In my opinion, the best all-around player behind Bird and Lebron. He was definitely better than Duncan. 

Duncan has longevity so I'd say he's the greatest, but KG is easily the best PF ever to play in the league.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

welcome to the site, at least you come strong


----------



## Geaux Tigers (Apr 26, 2004)

Duncan


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

Duncan, Malone and Barkley.

Arguably Petitt.


----------



## RollWithEm (Jul 16, 2002)

KG is borderline top 5. I'm not sure he was all that much better than McHale at their respective peaks.


----------



## Basel (Mar 31, 2005)

Duncan. Any other answer is wrong.


----------



## Ballscientist (Nov 11, 2002)

No. He is not. 
1. He is too skinny to defend the big guys. When I was 175 pounds, I was unable to defend a 260-pound guy.
2. Offensive rebounds.

Comparison:

Charles Barkley has the world best butt skills. He has improved his butt skills year after year and reach his prime as a Rocket.

Charles Barkley uses his lower body strength, big butt, and timing to chase down all the offensive rebounds.


----------



## l0st1 (Jul 2, 2010)

Wait, did I just read that Barkley's prime was in Housont? wtf?


----------



## hobojoe (Jun 20, 2003)

l0st1 said:


> Wait, did I just read that Barkley's prime was in Housont? wtf?


No, only his butt skills reached their prime in Houston.


----------



## jayk009 (Aug 6, 2003)

you can argue that kg's peak was the best of all time..but in terms of overall career..it's Tim Duncan


----------



## CelticsMan (Aug 28, 2015)

PauloCatarino said:


> Duncan, Malone and Barkley.
> 
> Arguably Petitt.


Duncan is arguable but he is definitely better than Malone and Barkley. I don't know much about Petitt.


----------



## CelticsMan (Aug 28, 2015)

RollWithEm said:


> KG is borderline top 5. I'm not sure he was all that much better than McHale at their respective peaks.


Who are 4-5 PFs better than KG?


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

CelticsMan said:


> Duncan is arguable* but he is definitely better than Malone and Barkley*. I don't know much about Petitt.


That, off course, is a matter of opinion. Mine is different.


----------



## CelticsMan (Aug 28, 2015)

Ballscientist said:


> No. He is not.
> 1. He is too skinny to defend the big guys. When I was 175 pounds, I was unable to defend a 260-pound guy.
> 2. Offensive rebounds.


You defending that guy is basically like Iverson trying to stop LeBron. KG is 255, just as much as Duncan weighs and does he have issue guarding big guys? 

KG went multiple seasons averaging 2.8-3 offensive boards a game, so idk what the issue with that is.


----------



## RollWithEm (Jul 16, 2002)

CelticsMan said:


> Who are 4-5 PFs better than KG?


I've got Ducan and Pettit as the unquestioned top 2. Then Barkley (who easily had a superior peak to KG's), Malone (who is one of the few PFs ever who can actually boast better longevity than KG), and then you have Dirk/KG/McHale in some order for the 5 thru 7 spots.


----------



## letsgoceltics (Aug 19, 2012)

RollWithEm said:


> I've got Ducan and Pettit as the unquestioned top 2. Then Barkley (who easily had a superior peak to KG's), Malone (who is one of the few PFs ever who can actually boast better longevity than KG), and then you have Dirk/KG/McHale in some order for the 5 thru 7 spots.


Dirk is better than KG? Man, I guess everyone woke up from their coma in 2012 or something.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

RollWithEm said:


> I've got Ducan and Pettit as the unquestioned top 2. Then Barkley (who easily had a superior peak to KG's), Malone (who is one of the few PFs ever who can actually boast better longevity than KG), and then you have Dirk/KG/McHale in some order for the 5 thru 7 spots.


Pettit's just so hard to talk about in this discussion - it's like trying to figure out where George Mikan fits in the greatest center discussion - because he came along _so_ much earlier than everyone else. Like, who was better - Bob Cousy or Jason Kidd? I agree with Duncan first, and I think you can defensibly put Dirk/Barkley/Malone/KG/McHale in whatever order you really want to based on how much you value offense versus defense. 

What I will say is that prime Garnett would have been even better in this current era of smallball and constant defensive switching, while Duncan would have come into the league as a full-time center had he come along now, instead of switching there as he got older, and that Minnesota did Garnett no favors wasting most of his first decade+ in the league.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

David Robinson is not a PF is the only reason we think of Duncan as a PF - everything about his game is C not PF


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

e-monk said:


> David Robinson is not a PF is the only reason we think of Duncan as a PF - everything about his game is C not PF


I've never agreed with that at all. He's a power forward.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

R-Star said:


> I've never agreed with that at all. He's a power forward.


Eh, I dunno, Duncan's been playing center more or less since 2007. Rasho Nesterovic is the last froncourt partner Duncan's started alongside for a full season who's definitively a center. I'd say he's spent the last third of his career as a center and would be a full-time center if he hit the league as a rookie today.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Bogg said:


> Eh, I dunno, Duncan's been playing center more or less since 2007. Rasho Nesterovic is the last froncourt partner Duncan's started alongside for a full season who's definitively a center. I'd say he's spent the last third of his career as a center and would be a full-time center if he hit the league as a rookie today.


I call Splitter a center as well. That being said, I agree. Once Duncan slowed down he moved more to the center role. In his prime though? Guy was a power forward. 

Duncan, Webber, KG.... man, we were spoiled.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

Bogg said:


> Eh, I dunno, Duncan's been playing center more or less since 2007. Rasho Nesterovic is the last froncourt partner Duncan's started alongside for a full season who's definitively a center. I'd say he's spent the last third of his career as a center and would be a full-time center if he hit the league as a rookie today.


I mean check down the line - he's a center and always has been - doesn't matter what position he gets penciled in for - it's like that Jalen Rose 'you are your skillset' quote blakejesus uses as a sig 

Duncan's skillset is prototypical, he's not a stretch, he's not a lunch pail off the ball JYD, he's a rim protecting, posting up certifiable center - at best you could argue that the positions are sort of interchangeable but increasingly the PF position is specialized in lots of ways that have nothing to do with how Duncan plays the game


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

e-monk said:


> I mean check down the line - he's a center and always has been - doesn't matter what position he gets penciled in for - it's like that Jalen Rose 'you are your skillset' quote blakejesus uses as a sig
> 
> Duncan's skillset is prototypical, he's not a stretch, he's not a lunch pail off the ball JYD, he's a rim protecting, posting up certifiable center - at best you could argue that the positions are sort of interchangeable but increasingly the PF position is specialized in lots of ways that have nothing to do with how Duncan plays the game


The guy has a decent mid range game for a big. I don't know what you're talking about. 

People try to say he's always been a center just because of his height and rim protection.


----------



## Pablo5 (Jun 18, 2013)

R-Star said:


> The guy has a decent mid range game for a big. I don't know what you're talking about.
> 
> People try to say he's always been a center just because of his height and rim protection.


Dont listen to e-skunk. Duncan is on always will be a PF. Maybe this season he may run at C so that LMA can play the PF...


----------



## RollWithEm (Jul 16, 2002)

letsgoceltics said:


> Dirk is better than KG?


My current 5-7 spots at the position are 

5) McHale
6) Garnett
7) Dirk

But those three are interchangeable in those three spots IMO.


----------



## GrandKenyon6 (Jul 19, 2005)

Kevin Garnett is probably the most over-rated player of all time. 

All bark, no bite. Never comfortable being a #1 option. KG was a player who was scared of the moment and was a completely different player in the fourth quarter than he was in the first three quarters.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)




----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

GrandKenyon6 said:


> Kevin Garnett is probably the most over-rated player of all time.
> 
> All bark, no bite. Never comfortable being a #1 option. KG was a player who was scared of the moment and was a completely different player in the fourth quarter than he was in the first three quarters.


I really believe the hype, press and media exposure have skewed a little the perception regarding guys like Allen Iverson and Kevin Garnett, who are/were not quite the players people seem to percieve them to be.

Regarding Garnett, although he WAS a very good defender and rebounder, he really was not a go-to guy on offense (like GrandKenyon6 has said), wich is somewhat of a no-no regarding a franchise player.
It was pretty clear when he was joined by Sprewell and Cassell and, later, Allen and Pierce.
Having said that, he should be considered no lower than #5 All-time PF.


----------



## Pablo5 (Jun 18, 2013)

PauloCatarino said:


> I really believe the hype, press and media exposure have skewed a little the perception regarding guys like Allen Iverson and Kevin Garnett, who are/were not quite the players people seem to percieve them to be.
> 
> Regarding Garnett, although he WAS a very good defender and rebounder, he really was not a go-to guy on offense (like GrandKenyon6 has said), wich is somewhat of a no-no regarding a franchise player.
> It was pretty clear when he was joined by Sprewell and Cassell and, later, Allen and Pierce.
> Having said that, he should be considered no lower than #5 All-time PF.


You know they (media) have once painted that picture of LBJ a few years ago.


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

Pablo5 said:


> You know they (media) have once painted that picture of LBJ a few years ago.


It was a different kind of hypeing (sp?).
With Iverson and KG they tried to bring all those phoney intangibles (Iverson representing a culture BS, Garnett being "real" and "tough", etc.) to prop them up. 
There was actually a poster that, back then, said that allen Iverson was the most well-knowned (sp?) sports athlete in the whole world (i mena, WTF?)

With LBJ, it was more about his actual basketball hability (because, you know, pretty much everyone agrees LBJ doesn't represent anything and is actually a kind of dumbass).


----------



## hobojoe (Jun 20, 2003)

PauloCatarino said:


> Regarding Garnett, although he WAS a very good defender and rebounder, he really was not a go-to guy on offense (like GrandKenyon6 has said), wich is somewhat of a no-no regarding a franchise player.
> It was pretty clear when he was joined by Sprewell and Cassell and, later, Allen and Pierce.
> Having said that, he should be considered no lower than #5 All-time PF.


This is primarily why I can't put Garnett ahead of Nowitzki. You can talk about KG's defensive advantages all you want, but I just can't get past Nowitzki being an undeniably great go to offensive player with an unguardable go to move. I also have a hard time looking past missing the playoffs three years in a row in your prime. Dallas overhauled and tweaked its roster many times over the years and didn't always have the greatest of talent around Dirk, but he led them to 50+ wins every year and brought them to the Finals twice, winning it once with Tyson Chandler/Jason Terry as the second best player.


----------



## GrandKenyon6 (Jul 19, 2005)

hobojoe said:


> This is primarily why I can't put Garnett ahead of Nowitzki. You can talk about KG's defensive advantages all you want, but I just can't get past Nowitzki being an undeniably great go to offensive player with an unguardable go to move. I also have a hard time looking past missing the playoffs three years in a row in your prime. Dallas overhauled and tweaked its roster many times over the years and didn't always have the greatest of talent around Dirk, but he led them to 50+ wins every year and brought them to the Finals twice, winning it once with Tyson Chandler/Jason Terry as the second best player.


Yep. I have Dirk way ahead of Garnett and I don't think it's particularly close.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

What players have you guys been watching? Dirk is a pretty great offensive player, but KG was great at more than just one thing. We've had these debates before though, should just go and look for one of those KG/TD comparison threads. At the end of the day, KG over achieved in MN, went to the Celts and elevated them to championship status. If he had played for an owner like Cuban who was shelling out money to chase titles or a genius like Pop, he'd probably be viewed more favorably in this thread.

Probably the best all around big man to have come out in a good while. TD is better, but the gap isn't that wide. Dirk is not as good as either.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

hobojoe said:


> This is primarily why I can't put Garnett ahead of Nowitzki. You can talk about KG's defensive advantages all you want, but I just can't get past Nowitzki being an undeniably great go to offensive player with an unguardable go to move. I also have a hard time looking past missing the playoffs three years in a row in your prime. Dallas overhauled and tweaked its roster many times over the years and didn't always have the greatest of talent around Dirk, but he led them to 50+ wins every year and brought them to the Finals twice, winning it once with Tyson Chandler/Jason Terry as the second best player.


KG's go to move was pretty unstoppable as well


----------



## jayk009 (Aug 6, 2003)

hobojoe said:


> This is primarily why I can't put Garnett ahead of Nowitzki. You can talk about KG's defensive advantages all you want, but I just can't get past Nowitzki being an undeniably great go to offensive player with an unguardable go to move. I also have a hard time looking past missing the playoffs three years in a row in your prime. Dallas overhauled and tweaked its roster many times over the years and didn't always have the greatest of talent around Dirk, but he led them to 50+ wins every year and brought them to the Finals twice, winning it once with Tyson Chandler/Jason Terry as the second best player.


KG's team had a winning record pretty much every season he was on the T-wolves. He had terrible management and you cannot blame his lack of championships on him. He was also their main scorer, main ball handler and anchor on defense while he was with the wolves. Yes, he prefers not to be the #1 option, but he was put into that role and he still excelled. Also, Tim Duncan has not been the "go-to" scorer for the past 2 championships...It doesn't mean that you can marginalize his impact on the game. The one year they had an actual second option on offense. You realize that Minnesota lost like 4 or 5 straight 1st round picks from their Joe Smith fiasco, and also they didn't have an owner who was willing to go all-out like Mark Cuban and get to buy free 1st round picks and get all-star level players for almost nothing. This was a time when 1st round picks were for sale for a million dollars. I'm telling you right now that if KG was on the Mavs they would win more then 1 title. 

People forget how much KG had to do on those Minnesota teams and how much of a beast he actually was. He was bringing the ball up the floor as their PF..

Anyways, defense is just as important(if not more) as offense and KG was light years ahead of Dirk. Also, he is a much much better rebounder and passer. Yes, Dirk was amazing offensively and he himself is a surefire hall of famer. But when you look at overall impact on the game it's KG and IMO it's not even close.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

jayk009 said:


> . He was bringing the ball up the floor as their PF..
> .


occasionally during one season - this wasn't ever routine for him nor ideal for the team


----------



## jayk009 (Aug 6, 2003)

It took their management 10 years to get him some good supporting players that could compliment him in Sprewell and Cassell and when they did they made it to the Western Finals right away. 

Before that his best team mates were Wally Sczerbiak and Terrell Brandon(then Troy Hudson) and a bunch of garbage. 

If you look at the Mavs team, some of his teams were truly stacked and actually Dirk was considered an underachiever for the longest time until he won his 1 title. To me it doesn't make sense that you give Dirk so much credit to Dirk to win 1 title, and then discount KG even though he also has 1 title as well.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Dirk isn't better than KG ... that's just a farce. If you watched how the Celts locked in that season, and how KG's defense pretty much altered the way they played teams and how they were played, such comparisons wouldn't be made.

Also funny how the Duncan is great folks don't use the defense argument when comparing him to someone like Dirk. Skillset wise, what can Duncan do that KG can't?

Bottom line, a couple of things affected KG's legacy

His loyalty to the Wolves hurt him in the long run. Should have bounced a few seasons before due to their ineptitude to surround him with talent

His attitude on court is a negative against him. Guys like TD and Dirk don't have that issue.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

HB said:


> Also funny how the Duncan is great folks don't use the defense argument when comparing him to someone like Dirk. Skillset wise, what can Duncan do that KG can't?


not sure what you're saying here, Duncan was just as good as Dirk offensively (in a more traditional way) much more clutch and a ++ defender to boot

as for what he can do that KG cant, be the center piece to an efficient offense


----------



## hobojoe (Jun 20, 2003)

jayk009 said:


> KG's team had a winning record pretty much every season he was on the T-wolves. He had terrible management and you cannot blame his lack of championships on him. He was also their main scorer, main ball handler and anchor on defense while he was with the wolves. Yes, he prefers not to be the #1 option, but he was put into that role and he still excelled. Also, Tim Duncan has not been the "go-to" scorer for the past 2 championships...It doesn't mean that you can marginalize his impact on the game. The one year they had an actual second option on offense. You realize that Minnesota lost like 4 or 5 straight 1st round picks from their Joe Smith fiasco, and also they didn't have an owner who was willing to go all-out like Mark Cuban and get to buy free 1st round picks and get all-star level players for almost nothing. This was a time when 1st round picks were for sale for a million dollars. I'm telling you right now that if KG was on the Mavs they would win more then 1 title.
> 
> People forget how much KG had to do on those Minnesota teams and how much of a beast he actually was. He was bringing the ball up the floor as their PF..
> 
> Anyways, defense is just as important(if not more) as offense and KG was light years ahead of Dirk. Also, he is a much much better rebounder and passer. Yes, Dirk was amazing offensively and he himself is a surefire hall of famer. But when you look at overall impact on the game it's KG and IMO it's not even close.


In 2005-06 and 2006-07, KG and Dirk were both somewhere in their respective 3-5 year primes. KG's Timberwolves lost 49 and 50 games, Dirk's Mavs won 60 and 67 games in the same Western Conference with Josh Howard and Jason Terry as his primary running mates. Mark Cuban's great and willing to spend the money, but that was all Dirk and some complementary pieces around. Let's not revise history and act like he was on loaded teams. I'll leave the conjecture and hypotheticals about what Garnett _would've_ done in other situations to you and keep my arguments based on reality and what actually happened.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

e-monk said:


> not sure what you're saying here, Duncan was just as good as Dirk offensively (in a more traditional way) much more clutch and a ++ defender to boot
> 
> as for what he can do that KG cant, be the center piece to an efficient offense


Define more clutch?

Anyhoo, Dirk is a better offensive player than both, which if we really want to go into it, I am not even sure that's true in either case. He had more range, which I guess gives him the nod.

With that said, no one is putting Dirk over TD, nor should they. He was surrounded by much better players for an extended period of time and came up short numerous times. KG on the other hand was surrounded by pretty mediocre players and over achieved for several years.

Not sure you even watched KG, who was the center piece on those wolves teams? Wally? Cassell? Hudson?


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

HB said:


> Define more clutch?


the ability to come up big in the biggest games



> Anyhoo, Dirk is a better offensive player than both, which if we really want to go into it, I am not even sure that's true in either case. He had more range, which I guess gives him the nod.


He has more range, that is all and that doesn't make him a better offensive player than Duncan anymore than you'd say Ray Allen was a better offensive player than TMAC (at his peak) simply because he was a better 3 pt shooter - in both cases the other player did everything else better


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

e-monk said:


> the ability to come up big in the biggest games
> 
> 
> 
> He has more range, that is all and that doesn't make him a better offensive player than Duncan anymore than you'd say Ray Allen was a better offensive player than TMAC (at his peak) simply because he was a better 3 pt shooter - in both cases the other player did everything else better


You do realize KG has had his fair share of big shots, talk less key defensive plays in the dying moments of games.

To me KG and TD are similar offensive players. There's nothing one can do, that the other can't. 

Noticed you didn't touch the Wolves center piece point I mentioned. Minnesota till date is still searching for a player as good offensively as KG was to that franchise.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

HB said:


> You do realize KG has had his fair share of big shots


honest to god I don't, the only time he was ever on the biggest stage he was watching the Truth do that work



> Noticed you didn't touch the Wolves center piece point I mentioned..


what is your point? that KG was the best player on a mediocre team that had trouble getting out of the first round? ok I will concede the point, that much is true


----------



## jayk009 (Aug 6, 2003)

hobojoe said:


> In 2005-06 and 2006-07, KG and Dirk were both somewhere in their respective 3-5 year primes. KG's Timberwolves lost 49 and 50 games, Dirk's Mavs won 60 and 67 games in the same Western Conference with Josh Howard and Jason Terry as his primary running mates. Mark Cuban's great and willing to spend the money, but that was all Dirk and some complementary pieces around. Let's not revise history and act like he was on loaded teams. I'll leave the conjecture and hypotheticals about what Garnett _would've_ done in other situations to you and keep my arguments based on reality and what actually happened.


Josh Howard at that time was considered an all-star level player as well as Jason Terry. Jerry Stackhouse was still a very good player at the time and they even had Keith Van Horn. Even Marquis Daniels was a very nice contributor and was viewed as a future all-star. This is way more than the T-wolves ever had. Not to mention a young Devin harris.

If you look at their roster you would see that they were incredibly deep and just because you don't remember these players it doesn't take away from the fact that they had a very good roster.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

e-monk said:


> honest to god I don't, the only time he was ever on the biggest stage he was watching the Truth do that work
> 
> 
> 
> what is your point? that KG was the best player on a mediocre team that had trouble getting out of the first round? ok I will concede the point, that much is true


Sir, he went to the Western conference finals in the 04 season with the likes of Nduidi Ebi, Trenton Hassell, Fred Hoiberg, Wally World and the 'great' Michael Olowkandi. Troy Hudson who was probably their second best player (yikes) was injured. 

KG put up 24, 14 and 5 that season. You might want to check how loaded the West was that season by the way.


----------



## jayk009 (Aug 6, 2003)

HB said:


> Sir, he went to the Western conference finals in the 04 season with the likes of Nduidi Ebi, Trenton Hassell, Fred Hoiberg, Wally World and the 'great' Michael Olowkandi. Troy Hudson who was probably their second best player (yikes) was injured.
> 
> KG put up 24, 14 and 5 that season. You might want to check how loaded the West was that season by the way.


They had Sam Cassell and Latrell Sprewell that year. 

This was the only year that he had an actual proper supporting cast and they did make it to the Western Finals.

But what people are forgetting is how the Mavericks were considered chokers in the playoffs, they would consistently finish #1 or 2 in the West and lose in the 1st or 2nd round almost every year. The year they did win a title, Dirk went god mode and he was really amazing but it's crazy that people don't remember all the years before that. 

Every off-season the mavs would acquire another name all-star worthy player..They would get players like Antawn Jamison or Antoine Walker like it was nothing.Before that he had Michael Finley and Steve Nash.I mean 12 years later we know how their careers ended so we don't think much of some of these players but at the time they were all-star level players still in the primes of their careers. Anyways...The point I'm making is that the Mavericks did everything they could to surround Dirk with the best talent possible and KG did not have the same benefit.


----------



## edabomb (Feb 12, 2005)

Dirk's Playoff career >> KG's Playoff career.

Debate.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

jayk009 said:


> They had Sam Cassell and Latrell Sprewell that year.


Both in their mid 30s that year


----------



## jayk009 (Aug 6, 2003)

HB said:


> Both in their mid 30s that year


They were clearly their 2nd and 3rd best player. You said Troy Hudson was their 2nd best player..He was not.

I know you're trying to make your argument seem stronger by omitting them but it just takes away all of your credibility.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

jayk009 said:


> They were clearly their 2nd and 3rd best player. You said Troy Hudson was their 2nd best player..He was not.
> 
> I know you're trying to make your argument seem stronger by omitting them but it just takes away all of your credibility.


I was highlighting the less stellar character he had to play with. Not like Sprewell and Cassell were setting the world on fire anyhoo. And yes prior to that season, Hudson had a pretty good playoff series. He was primed for a good year.


----------



## jayk009 (Aug 6, 2003)

HB said:


> I was highlighting the less stellar character he had to play with. Not like Sprewell and Cassell were setting the world on fire anyhoo. And yes prior to that season, Hudson had a pretty good playoff series. He was primed for a good year.


It's like me saying..Lebron had to play with James Jones, Mike Miller, Chris Andersen and then not even mention Wade or Bosh.....

Cassell was all-star level that year, Sprewell was a good 3rd option. They were still quality players at that time.


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

jayk009 said:


> It's like me saying..Lebron had to play with James Jones, Mike Miller, Chris Andersen and then not even mention Wade or Bosh.....
> 
> Cassell was all-star level that year, Sprewell was a good 3rd option. They were still quality players at that time.


HB is also omitting it was Cassell and Sprewell (mainly the first) the closers in the 4th quarter for the Wolves. NOT KG.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

But their best player was still KG no?


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

This thread is ****ing stupid.

And quit saying anyhoo.


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

About the "poor rosters" KG had in Minny:

This was the starting 5 of the World Champions Dallas Mavericks (playoff stats):

Jason Kidd (9.3(4.5/7.3);
DeShawn Stevenson (4.5/0.9/0.6)
Shawn Marion (11.9/6.3/2.1)
Dirk
Tyson Chandler (8.0/9.0/0.4)

They defeated a Miami Heat team that sported Lebron James, Dwyane Wade and Chris Bosh, all in their primes.

And Duncan won multiple championships without another SEASON All-Nba alongside him.
Just check out the 2002-2003 World Champions Spurs: a 20 year old Tony Parker, David Robinson on his last legs, Bruce Bowen and Steohen Javkson.


----------



## CelticsMan (Aug 28, 2015)

Except Jason Kidd was still a great distributor, in that SG spot you had Terry getting the majority of the minutes off the bench and he averaged nearly 20 in the playoffs, Shawn Mario and Tyson Chandler were HUGE defensively that year. Not to mention LeBron only averaging 17 points a game.

That 2003 team surrounding Duncan is better than any team KG had around him except for maybe the 2004 team. Name one Minnesota team where you look at it and say "Garnett really could have won a ring with that team".


----------



## edabomb (Feb 12, 2005)

The fact that you can interchange Garnett and Nowitzki on to each others Championship teams and not be confident they still win says a lot about how different their strengths are.

The 2011 Mavs with Garnett at PF would have been a first or second round out in all likelihood.

On the other hand a line up of Allen, Pierce and Nowitzki would have been absolutely crazy - but is it much different to Nash, Finley and Nowtizki? Where's the D?

I really think it is a close debate between these two when all is said and done. The thing that may swing it KG's way is that his offense was better than Nowitzki's D. But then Nowitzki led two teams to the Finals as the undispited Alpha - he also has a Finals MVP to his credit.

Timmy D is on another level IMO.


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

CelticsMan said:


> Except Jason Kidd was still a great distributor, in that SG spot you had Terry getting the majority of the minutes off the bench and he averaged nearly 20 in the playoffs, Shawn Mario and Tyson Chandler were HUGE defensively that year.


I'm not saying the Mavs sucked. I'm just saying Dirk had a less than stellar supporting cast around him.



> Not to mention LeBron only averaging 17 points a game.


Why should Lebron James' stinking up the place tarnish what Dirk achieved? 



> That 2003 team surrounding Duncan is better than any team KG had around him except for maybe the 2004 team. Name one Minnesota team where you look at it and say "Garnett really could have won a ring with that team".


I'm not saying KG should have won a ring with the supporting cast he had in Minny. It wasn't that good, indeed. I'm just saying other great PFs DID win WITHOUT great supporting casts.

BTW, any thoughts regarding:
- Why was KG the sole (IIRC) MVP since 1980 that couldn't get to the playoffs the season after he won the award?
- why did KG go from 22.4ppg/12.8rpg/4.1 from his last season in Minny to 18.8/9.2/3.4 in his first season in Boston?


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

HB said:


> Sir, he went to the Western conference finals in the 04 season with the likes of Nduidi Ebi, Trenton Hassell, Fred Hoiberg, Wally World and the 'great' Michael Olowkandi. Troy Hudson who was probably their second best player (yikes) was injured.


wasn't that the season he had 'Sam I Am' and Latrell Sprewell at his back? 

wait for it...

oh yeah it was - and the reason they didn't get past the Lakers was that 'Sam I Am' went down (not Troy Hudson) so they had no one to make big shots

for someone throwing shit talk around about not watching KG's T-Wolves you might want to get a better fact checker


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

\\unnecessary piling on - self edit


----------



## Pablo5 (Jun 18, 2013)

edabomb said:


> The fact that you can interchange Garnett and Nowitzki on to each others Championship teams and not be confident they still win says a lot about how different their strengths are.
> 
> The 2011 Mavs with Garnett at PF would have been a first or second round out in all likelihood.
> 
> ...


This is the best post in this thread. The only thing I have a hard time with is Dirk being a alpha. Yes, he had a great Finals run, but was it more on the lines that he finally had the team chemistry he needed to get it done. Besides people are forgetting the value of having Chandler on that Mavs team that season.


----------



## GrandKenyon6 (Jul 19, 2005)

The Celtics' success was no surprise as KG slid into his more natural role of complementary player on offense.

And it's no coincidence that the only year KG's Wolves had any success was the year he had Sam Cassell to take the big shots in the fourth quarter for him.

KG was a terrific defensive player, great all around player, and good offensive player, but I'm taking the guy who can put a team on his back and will it to victory 10 times out of 10. That was never KG's game. I don't believe 2nd fiddle type players can be considered "greatest of all time".


----------



## Pablo5 (Jun 18, 2013)

GrandKenyon6 said:


> The Celtics' success was no surprise as KG slid into his more natural role of complementary player on offense.
> 
> And it's no coincidence that the only year KG's Wolves had any success was the year he had Sam Cassell to take the big shots in the fourth quarter for him.
> 
> KG was a terrific defensive player, great all around player, and good offensive player, *but I'm taking the guy who can put a team on his back and will it to victory 10 times out of 10*. That was never KG's game. I don't believe 2nd fiddle type players can be considered "greatest of all time".


Well it's no way youre talking Dirk then. How many years did the Mavs have 1st or 2nd best record in the Nba and not make it to the WCF. Dirk was looked at being a soft shooter and that what he was exactly until 2011. Now all of sudden his in most top 5, lmao.....


----------



## GNG (Aug 17, 2002)

HB said:


> Sir, he went to the Western conference finals in the 04 season with the likes of Nduidi Ebi, Trenton Hassell, Fred Hoiberg, Wally World and the 'great' Michael Olowkandi. Troy Hudson who was probably their second best player (yikes) was injured.
> 
> KG put up 24, 14 and 5 that season. You might want to check how loaded the West was that season by the way.


Nice memory, @HB.

The Wolves had Sam Cassell (Second Team All-NBA) and Latrell Sprewell on that team.

Ndudi Ebi was a rookie non-factor who played a grand total of 32 minutes the whole season, so I'm not even sure why you're even mentioning him (and naming him first, no less!) on your supposed list of contributors that season.

You might want to check your facts before you tell others to do it.


----------



## GNG (Aug 17, 2002)

HB said:


> Both in their mid 30s that year


Again, Sam Cassell played in the All-Star Game and was named Second Team All-NBA that season.

He averaged 20 ppg and 7 apg with 49/40/87 shooting splits and a 22.8 PER.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

you're kind of just piling on now don't you think?


----------



## GNG (Aug 17, 2002)

e-monk said:


> you're kind of just piling on now don't you think?


I responded as I went through the thread.


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

Pablo5 said:


> Well it's no way youre talking Dirk then. How many years did the Mavs have 1st or 2nd best record in the Nba and not make it to the WCF. Dirk was looked at being a soft shooter and that what he was exactly until 2011. Now all of sudden his in most top 5, lmao.....


Dirk (and the Mavs) did have some clunkers. You're right.
In Dirk's prime (counting All-Nba selections) he lost 5 times in the 1st round.
BUT
He always made the playoffs, went to the Finals twice, lots 4 times in the Semis and once in the CF.

Minnesotta Garnett (prime) lost 5 times in the 1st round, once in the CF, and missed the playoffs 3 straight seasons (his last 3 in Minny).

Minnesotta Garnett had little to none success in the playoffs as a franchise player. Dirk was hot-and-cold, but he did lead his team to the Finals twice (winning once).

Now, IMHO KG > Dirk. But i see an argument being made (in fact, posters are making it in ths thread) being the other way around.


----------



## jericho (Jul 12, 2002)

No love whatsoever for Elvin Hayes?


----------



## kbdullah (Jul 8, 2010)

edabomb said:


> The fact that you can interchange Garnett and Nowitzki on to each others Championship teams and not be confident they still win says a lot about how different their strengths are.
> 
> The 2011 Mavs with Garnett at PF would have been a first or second round out in all likelihood.
> 
> ...


I agree with this...you could not put Garnett on Dallas 2011 team and win a title, no way. But put Garnett on some of those Nash, Finley, J. Howard teams (the '03-'04 team stands out) and you've got something pretty deadly.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

PauloCatarino said:


> BTW, any thoughts regarding:
> - Why was KG the sole (IIRC) MVP since 1980 that couldn't get to the playoffs the season after he won the award?
> - why did KG go from 22.4ppg/12.8rpg/4.1 from his last season in Minny to 18.8/9.2/3.4 in his first season in Boston?


Probably the same reason that prime Kobe Bryant and prime Dwyane Wade both spent multiple seasons either getting bounced in the first round or failing to make the playoffs entirely immediately after Shaq's departure, and only went back to winning titles after their front offices put other all-NBA players alongside them. Pretty much every all-league guy generally considered to be a "winner" has had the same results KG did in Minnesota when put in the same situation. 

Also, you're conveniently omitting that KG won the DPOY his first (and only fully healthy) year in Boston as the backbone of a historically great defense. 

Also - people are seriously downplaying the 2011 Mavs. Tyson Chandler won the DPOY the following season with the Knicks based largely on a rep built during his 2011 run with the Mavs, which netted him an all-defense nod at the time, while Terry had recently won the 6MOY. If we really want to be technical about it Jason Kidd was an all-star as recently as the previous season, although that was an extremely shaky injury replacement selection by the commissioner that I'm convinced was the result of the game being in Dallas and a big snowstorm shutting down the Dallas airport. A best-in-the-league defensive center, some high-level defensive roleplayers in Stevenson and Marion, a supporting scorer in Terry, and Jason Kidd keeping the ball moving and generally guiding everyone along is a team built specifically to hide Dirk's weaknesses and play to his strengths. 

It makes no sense to knock KG for putting him with a pair of high-scoring wings and letting him take care of everything else but overlook that Dirk got his only ring when Dallas put him on a team that let him worry about nothing _but_ scoring the ball.


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

Bogg said:


> Probably the same reason that prime Kobe Bryant and prime Dwyane Wade both spent multiple seasons either getting bounced in the first round or failing to make the playoffs entirely immediately after Shaq's departure, and only went back to winning titles after their front offices put other all-NBA players alongside them. Pretty much every all-league guy generally considered to be a "winner" has had the same results KG did in Minnesota when put in the same situation.


This is your "answer" to what question of mine? I don't quite follow...



> Also, you're conveniently omitting that KG won the DPOY his first (and only fully healthy) year in Boston as the backbone of a historically great defense.


I omitt (sp?) nothing. I'm talking about the Minesotta Garnett.

I wrote on this forum AT THE TIME that i was happy KG had the chance to play with Pierce and Allen. Because he had the opportunity to make the most out of his skillset without having to worry about his weakness (go-to scoring). Because he finally had the chance to be what he was most poised to be: a great, great second fiddle player. 



> Also - people are seriously downplaying the 2011 Mavs. Tyson Chandler won the DPOY the following season with the Knicks based largely on a rep built during his 2011 run with the Mavs, which netted him an all-defense nod at the time, while Terry had recently won the 6MOY. If we really want to be technical about it Jason Kidd was an all-star as recently as the previous season, although that was an extremely shaky injury replacement selection by the commissioner that I'm convinced was the result of the game being in Dallas and a big snowstorm shutting down the Dallas airport. A best-in-the-league defensive center, some high-level defensive roleplayers in Stevenson and Marion, a supporting scorer in Terry, and Jason Kidd keeping the ball moving and generally guiding everyone along is a team built specifically to hide Dirk's weaknesses and play to his strengths.


It wasn't a great team, dude. 
It was their "Conderella Year" and that was it.



> It makes no sense to knock KG for putting him with a pair of high-scoring wings and letting him take care of everything else but overlook that Dirk got his only ring when Dallas put him on a team that let him worry about nothing _but_ scoring the ball.


Story goes that Kevin Garnett ws the kind of player it would be harder to build a team around. Sure, he was a jack-of-all-trades, but he needed guys to do what he couldn't: close out games.
You are right in the sense that Dirk was such a great offensive player all you needed to do was to surround him with good, complementary defensive players. Kinda like Iverson's Sixers (although Iverson couldn't shoot for shit).
But hey, like i said, i have KG above Dirk in the all-time PF list...


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

PauloCatarino said:


> This is your "answer" to what question of mine? I don't quite follow...


You asked why Garnett had trouble getting to the playoffs and had a drop in statistical production when going from Minnesota to a vastly superior Boston team. It's the same reason that players of comparable stature, in Bryant and Wade, followed a similar pattern of having some of their best statistical seasons happen with bad supporting casts - when you have to do everything because nobody else can, you pile up counting stats while losing games. 





PauloCatarino said:


> I omitt (sp?) nothing. I'm talking about the Minesotta Garnett.
> 
> I wrote on this forum AT THE TIME that i was happy KG had the chance to play with Pierce and Allen. Because he had the opportunity to make the most out of his skillset without having to worry about his weakness (go-to scoring). Because he finally had the chance to be what he was most poised to be: a great, great second fiddle player.


I don't even love Garnett that much, as far as Celtics fans go, but he was the best player on that title team. Pierce was the featured scorer and the Celtic lifer, but KG was the best player. 





PauloCatarino said:


> It wasn't a great team, dude.
> It was their "Conderella Year" and that was it.


I don't know how shaky a team can really be with a DPOY winner, an MVP winner, and a 6MOY winner all more or less in their prime or around the tail end of it. They weren't the greatest "on paper" squad in terms of name recognition, but they had the right mix of pieces hitting at the right time. 





PauloCatarino said:


> Story goes that Kevin Garnett ws the kind of player it would be harder to build a team around. Sure, he was a jack-of-all-trades, but he needed guys to do what he couldn't: close out games.
> You are right in the sense that Dirk was such a great offensive player all you needed to do was to surround him with good, complementary defensive players. Kinda like Iverson's Sixers (although Iverson couldn't shoot for shit).
> But hey, like i said, i have KG above Dirk in the all-time PF list...


I mean, does it matter that Garnett led the Celtics in scoring during the 2008 postseason, or that he averaged less than a point per game less than Pierce during the regular season? People act like Pierce and Ray Allen averaged 30 a piece that year while Garnett settled into a defense-only role, but all three scored at roughly the same level over the 2008 season - Pierce/Allen/KG averaged about 20/17/19, respectively, points per night in the regular season and 22/20/18, again respectively, points per night in the Finals. Scoring on that squad was a general team effort - not 1a, 1b, and a clear 3rd option.


----------



## CelticsMan (Aug 28, 2015)

PauloCatarino said:


> I'm not saying the Mavs sucked. I'm just saying Dirk had a less than stellar supporting cast around him.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


And I understand your point about others winning with less, but their "less" is nowhere near as bad as Garnett's "less".

Because the best player in the world not even making an effort to win definitely had an impact on them winning. It was a 6 games series with him averaging 17, if that number was 20 or higher, Dallas would still have 0 championships. Dallas didn't win it as much as LeBron lost it. That's why it matters.


And regarding your thoughts, the 05 Wolves missed the playoffs because the main scorers, Cassell and Spreewell's preformance took a large drop, causing them to win only 44, which is enough to qualify most seasons but not that one. (And wouldn't Durant also be on that list?)

Why did he drop like that? Simple. Less Minutes. Less Touches. Paul Pierce and Ray Allen getting 19 and 18 points a game.


----------



## hobojoe (Jun 20, 2003)

Pablo5 said:


> Well it's no way youre talking Dirk then. How many years did the Mavs have 1st or 2nd best record in the Nba and not make it to the WCF.


Once?


----------



## Pablo5 (Jun 18, 2013)

hobojoe said:


> Once?


Ok, I take that back knowing that you can have 58 wins and still be a 4 seed. From 2000-2010 they have lost in the first or second rounds 8 times. Dirk is a good player and will be a HOF'er, but he isnt ahead of KG in any top 5 list.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Alright, he got Cassell and Sprewell and they made it to the finals. Whoop de damn doo! What happened to those guys the season after? Anyone with a good memory remember?

Duncan and Dirk have been playing with legit stars for years, isn't it interesting the one year KG got some good players he made it to the WCF?

You'd have to be living in denial to not realize just how great he was on defense that year the Celts won it all. That's the kind of impact the guy brings to a team. TD obviously gets the nod, but there's no way Dirk is being picked over KG. If you were starting a team would you go with such a flawed player when there's a KG on the board that can pretty much do everything on the court?


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

GNG said:


> Again, Sam Cassell played in the All-Star Game and was named Second Team All-NBA that season.
> 
> He averaged 20 ppg and 7 apg with 49/40/87 shooting splits and a 22.8 PER.


Hey man such is life, been a while.


----------



## hobojoe (Jun 20, 2003)

HB said:


> Alright, he got Cassell and Sprewell and they made it to the finals. Whoop de damn doo! What happened to those guys the season after? Anyone with a good memory remember?
> 
> Duncan and Dirk have been playing with legit stars for years, isn't it interesting the one year KG got some good players he made it to the WCF?


Stars like Jason Terry and Tyson Chandler? Again, Mark Cuban has always been willing to spend money and make moves, but that doesn't mean the moves always worked out. Acting like Dirk was on loaded rosters for his entire career is revisionist history and utter nonsense. 

You want to heap praise on Garnett for his one successful season in Minnesota with Cassell and Sprewell, yet Nowitzki did more with less on multiple occasions in Dallas.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

hobojoe said:


> Stars like Jason Terry and Tyson Chandler? Again, Mark Cuban has always been willing to spend money and make moves, but that doesn't mean the moves always worked out. *Acting like Dirk was on loaded rosters for his entire career is revisionist history and utter nonsense.*
> 
> You want to heap praise on Garnett for his one successful season in Minnesota with Cassell and Sprewell, yet Nowitzki did more with less on multiple occasions in Dallas.


Umm yes he has, at least up until recently when Cuban decided he wasn't going to be throwing money around like it was going out of fashion. With an owner like Cuban, the Mavs were able to shuffle the deck until they got it right. Mr Garnett had to leave to win his title simply because of the incompetence plaguing the Wolves.

Dirk is a fantastic player no doubt, but he has very obvious flaws. Garnett's flaws aren't as exaggerated. I think it will be much harder to find a Garnett than a Dirk.


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

HB said:


> *Umm yes he has,* at least up until recently when Cuban decided he wasn't going to be throwing money around like it was going out of fashion. With an owner like Cuban, the Mavs were able to shuffle the deck until they got it right. Mr Garnett had to leave to win his title simply because of the incompetence plaguing the Wolves.
> 
> Dirk is a fantastic player no doubt, but he has very obvious flaws. Garnett's flaws aren't as exaggerated. I think it will be much harder to find a Garnett than a Dirk.


Point them out, please.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

PauloCatarino said:


> Point them out, please.


Steve Nash
Michael Finley
Antawn Jamison
Jerry Stackhouse
Keith Van Horn
Josh Howard
Jason Kidd

Just to name a few


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

HB said:


> Steve Nash
> Michael Finley
> Antawn Jamison
> Jerry Stackhouse
> ...


Hobojoe was referring to "loaded rosters". You are naming players that didn't play within the same *roster*.

Please name the loaded rosters you said Dirk had.


----------



## GNG (Aug 17, 2002)

HB said:


> Steve Nash
> Michael Finley
> Antawn Jamison
> Jerry Stackhouse
> ...


Wouldn't Jerry Stackhouse, Keith Van Horn and Jason Kidd all fall under of the category of 30something former-stars you tried using pinning on Sam Cassell and Latrell Sprewell earlier in the thread?


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Just curious what would that achieve? 

Only for you to nitpick how good those players were? 

How about their 67 win team that had 'all star' Josh Howard and still managed to lose in the first round to the Warriors?


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

GNG said:


> Wouldn't Jerry Stackhouse, Keith Van Horn and Jason Kidd all fall under of the category of 30something former-stars you tried using pinning on Sam Cassell and Latrell Sprewell earlier in the thread?


And?

KG had only one season were management tried to bring in decent players to help, and when they did, they brought in two guys that were on the downside of their careers. Can the same be said about the Mavs?


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Even with my shoddy memory, pretty sure most on this board were panning those moves when they were made. There's a reason why Cassell and Sprewell were so readily available.


----------



## Pablo5 (Jun 18, 2013)

HB said:


> Just curious what would that achieve?
> 
> Only for you to nitpick how good those players were?
> 
> How about their 67 win team that had 'all star' Josh Howard and still managed to lose in the first round to the Warriors?


Or the 8-10 times they were eliminated in the first or second round. You're waisting your time man. Dirk is a great player but it's a reason why he was labeled soft…..


----------



## hobojoe (Jun 20, 2003)

Pablo5 said:


> Or the 8-10 times they were eliminated in the first or second round. You're waisting your time man. Dirk is a great player but it's a reason why he was labeled soft…..


You do realize that only 4 teams make it past the second round every year, right? Tim Duncan has been eliminated in the first or second round 9 times, freaking loser.


----------



## Pablo5 (Jun 18, 2013)

nice try lil fella! 5 championships later says you don't know shit......


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

and your post shows you don't understand sarcasm


----------



## Pablo5 (Jun 18, 2013)

e-monk said:


> and your post shows you don't understand sarcasm


Sarcasm or not any player that hasn't made any defensive team in his career shouldn't be in anyone's top 5 list.


----------



## hobojoe (Jun 20, 2003)

Pablo5 said:


> nice try lil fella! 5 championships later says you don't know shit......



Wow


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

the argument that garnett couldn't close out games is stupid , he had a nearly undefendable turnaround jumper as his go to move in his prime .

but...he didn't play the traditionally low % hero ball, when other teams swarmed him he passed the ball and until 03-04 when he did that it didn't work out against great teams and they lost in the playoffs because he was passing the ball to wally z or joe smith or trent hassell or some other not ready to score player who was left open. truth be told no one can win under those conditions , not Jordan LeBron dirk or Duncan.

his teams were pretty bad generally but as a player he was much better than dirk, dirk had a hall of famer in his prime (nash ) and never got it done, he got Cuban's bankbook bringing in Jamison, walker, daniels drafted josh howard and a host of others ...they were capable of making the playoffs without dirk ....no t-wolf team was . they had plenty of opportunities and basically failed miserably to build a decent team around garnett

I don't think garnett was the best pf of all time i do think he was the best regular season pf of all time , but i cant give him credit for doing what i believe he could do in the playoffs , when Duncan did what was needed to secure his status .

dirk actually underachieved for years in the playoffs because he did not excel at traditional power forward duties (screen setting, rebounding, defense) and they had to surround him with guys who made up for his flaws in marion and chandler and let him concentrate on scoring for him to be successful and its why ultimately why they had to let go of nash who was a defensive liability and took a chance on marquis daniels who wasn't 

no point guard could be in the discussion of best ever if his team had to bring in guys to help him do his positional duties like setting up teammates , no shooting guard or small forward could be in the best of their positional debates if they weren't good scorers or shooters and their team had to bring in guys to help them shoot/score because they were below average at those aspects for them to win.

dirk does not belong in the discussion for best power forward ever anymore than dennis rodman does who excelled at defense , intangibles and rebounding but didn't score so for him to win you needed scorers out there with him to take up the slack like Jordan and pippen, or in Detroit with aquirre Thomas and dumars 

if you are really among the best ever , you don't need specialized help to take up your slack ...the all time great ones pick up lesser players ....not the other way around.

so in conclusion duncan #1 
garnett 1a

and truthfully no else is a a close 3rd because they are the guys who put the 5 spot on the backburner(when that center wasn't shaq) and made power forward a premier position in the league when Jordan retired in 98


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

Da Grinch said:


> the argument that garnett couldn't close out games is stupid , he had a nearly undefendable turnaround jumper as his go to move in his prime .
> 
> but...he didn't play the traditionally low % hero ball, when other teams swarmed him he passed the ball and until 03-04 when he did that it didn't work out against great teams and they lost in the playoffs because he was passing the ball to wally z or joe smith or trent hassell or some other not ready to score player who was left open. truth be told no one can win under those conditions , not Jordan LeBron dirk or Duncan.
> 
> ...


Maybe you weren't around this forum in 2008. That's when Garnett was LAUGHED AT by posters in this very own forum when he was passing up shots in the 4th quarter of playoff games. Again: LAUGHED AT.

That "nearly undefendable turnaround jumper" bullshit MAYBE pertained to regular season games. In the playoffs, Garnett needed a closer, because he wasn't good enough/didn't have the guts to do it. Cassell was it in Minny. Pierce and Allen were it in Boston.

So Garnett needed "specialized help" (your words). That's hardly news. It just seems you are arguing against yourself, bro. 

And "truthfully no else is a a close 3rd"? Were you around to see Charles Barkley and Karl Malone? Did you see The Shot over Hakeem? Did you see a 40 year old Karl Malone defend a 27 year old Garnett to .463FG%? Jesus!


----------



## CelticsMan (Aug 28, 2015)

2008.... If I'm a coach and I need a go to scorer I'm going to my high scoring forward or my deadeye shooting SG before I go to my PF, no matter how good he is. I'm not surprised he was passing away shots.

And Charles and Malone are definitely right behind the two. 

And to be fair, KG's outside shooting game kept his FG% lower than most PF's.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

he never hit those shots - go get that youtube video of his 'top 10 clutch moments' to prove me wrong... - he was a great player but he was never particularly clutch - he didn't really ball out even in those finals series - he turned Pau into his bitch in the win and Pau returned the favor in the loss and that's about the extent of his big game contributions - do you remember that game 7 where Pau had 18 rebounds and Kobe had 15 rebounds and KG had 3 rebounds? do you?

clearly you don't - big games were not something he did particularly well so just stop it


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

Garnett won a title in 2008 if posters were laughing at him , time has clearly proven them idiots.

Also pierce could play defense, rebound, pass , shoot and score in what world was he a specialist?

If you are calling him that you don't understand the term.

Garnett dominated Malone in that series 23.7 pts and 13.5 rebs vs 12.0 and 9.3

He also outshot him .463 to .448 fg 

Even shot .429 from 3 that series.


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

Da Grinch said:


> Garnett won a title in 2008 if posters were laughing at him , time has clearly proven them idiots.


So did Eddie House. What's your point?
Posters were laughing at KG because he was shying (sp?) away from putting up shots on the 4th quarter of close playoff games.



> Also pierce could play defense, rebound, pass , shoot and score in what world was he a specialist?
> 
> If you are calling him that you don't understand the term.


Huh? Did i call him that?



> Garnett dominated Malone in that series 23.7 pts and 13.5 rebs vs 12.0 and 9.3
> 
> He also outshot him .463 to .448 fg


KG's regular season stats were 24.2ppg (on .499FG%), 13.9rpg, 5.0apg, 1.5spg and 2.2bpg in 39.4mpg.
Against a 40 year old Karl Malone who had injuries thorough the season: 23.7 (on .463FG%), 13.5rpg, 4.5apg, 1.2spg and 1.2bpg in 44mpg.

So, eventhough he played *five more minutes per game*, his stats were ALL down from the regular seson. Is that "domination"? 



> Even shot .429 from 3 that series.


He made 3 three pointers in 6 games. Whoop-de-doo.


----------



## CelticsMan (Aug 28, 2015)

But Eddie House didn't lead the team. Eddie House was very replaceable. Garnett was absolutely key in the win.

Even with "down" stats he still put up 24 14 and 5 as you said, which yes, is domination.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

TD isn't the Spurs go to guy in the fourth either, and why should your big be by the way?


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

TD has hit tons of big shots - the one I remember very clearly is the one right before Fisher's .04 but there are others that I'm sure Spurs fans can recall - more importantly just look at his stats whore totals games in the play-offs - in his prime he was the master of 30-teens games - definitely not afraid of his shadows in the big moments

definitely not putting up 3 whole rebounds in a deciding game predicated by rebounds like the one I'm talking about where neither team could a buy basket and his primary role was defensive board bounding big - the Lakers won that title by punking that dude - Kobe and Pau punked that dude - point blank 33 boards to 3


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

I also recall when TD had the free throw issues, and he was having problems hitting key FTs down the stretch.

Again TD great and all that good stuff, not debatable. But the stuff you all are making out as big issues against KG is a non-issue. He's hit clutch shots as well, missed some too. But in terms of clutch defense, he's right up there with anyone.


----------



## hobojoe (Jun 20, 2003)

Tim Duncan closed out an NBA Finals with a near quadruple-double. What are we talking about here?


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

hobojoe said:


> Tim Duncan closed out an NBA Finals with a near quadruple-double. What are we talking about here?


It was a little time ago. And it was against the Nets. Few remember/care.

I wonder if KG ever got a 21-20-10-8 game in a game. Let alone in the playoffs. Let alone in the Finals.

EDIT: KG never accomplished that. In fact, Duncan is the only one registered in b/r data base. Regular season OR playoffs.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Ok and?

Was TD's greatness ever in question?

KG had a season where he had 6apg. Wanna check who he was playing with that year?


----------



## XxIrvingxX (Apr 23, 2012)

HB said:


> Ok and?
> 
> *Was TD's greatness ever in question?*
> 
> KG had a season where he had 6apg. Wanna check who he was playing with that year?


Isn't that the point of this thread?


----------



## CelticsMan (Aug 28, 2015)

Paulo, KG never had the 21-20-10-8 line (which is a really specific line to search) because while he's a great defender, he doesn't get blocks like Duncan did/does. 

But Garnett is the only other player to get 20-20-10 line in the playoffs, so case can be made still


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

CelticsMan said:


> Paulo, KG never had the 21-20-10-8 line (which is a really specific line to search) because while he's a great defender, he doesn't get blocks like Duncan did/does.
> 
> But Garnett is the only other player to get 20-20-10 line in the playoffs, so case can be made still


Dude, there's no denying Kevin Garnett was a great player. No doubt. Just don't make him more than what he was. 
Because no, Kevin Garnett IS NOT the "best PF of all time". Duncan is. 
IMHO, it's pretty clear Karl Malone ranks above KG. Barkley and Petitt, it's arguable. Dirk? No.
That's it.


----------



## CelticsMan (Aug 28, 2015)

The only thing that Duncan has on KG is shot blocking, and while many like to point at longevity, KG was good for 17 years while Duncan has 18. 

Malone had Stockton so his stats are much better than they would be without him, and he wasn't as good as KG or Duncan defensively or rebounding-wise, so he isn't above him. Barkley, that is very arguable. Pettit, idk because it's really hard to compare players from before the 70's as the game was so much more different.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

CelticsMan said:


> The only thing that Duncan has on KG is shot blocking, and while many like to point at longevity, KG was good for 17 years while Duncan has 18.
> 
> Malone had Stockton so his stats are much better than they would be without him, and he wasn't as good as KG or Duncan defensively or rebounding-wise, so he isn't above him. Barkley, that is very arguable. Pettit, idk because it's really hard to compare players from before the 70's as the game was so much more different.


You talk about KG's 17 years to Duncans 18, but Duncan has been the centerpiece to his team for 18 years while KG has been a shadow of his former self since getting traded from Boston.

They're both very good players. Especially in their primes. But there really is no argument for picking KG over Duncan.


----------



## edabomb (Feb 12, 2005)

CelticsMan said:


> *The only thing that Duncan has on KG is shot blocking*, and while many like to point at longevity, KG was good for 17 years while Duncan has 18.
> 
> Malone had Stockton so his stats are much better than they would be without him, and he wasn't as good as KG or Duncan defensively or rebounding-wise, so he isn't above him. Barkley, that is very arguable. Pettit, idk because it's really hard to compare players from before the 70's as the game was so much more different.


Wow.

For one - KG cannot hold a torch to Timmy D when it comes to low post offense.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

PauloCatarino said:


> Dude, there's no denying Kevin Garnett was a great player. No doubt. Just don't make him more than what he was.
> Because no, Kevin Garnett IS NOT the "best PF of all time". Duncan is.
> IMHO, it's pretty clear Karl Malone ranks above KG. Barkley and Petitt, it's arguable. Dirk? No.
> That's it.


if you judged malone like you do garnett i dont think you'd see it that way .

karl malone played with a HOF pg throughout his prime as well as other standout players and didnt get anywhere until his western conference contemporaries (,magic ,worthy, robinson,olajuwon, drexler and barkley) faded due to injuries and age , getting his 2 finals appearances before the new crop (kobe, garnett duncan, sheed) came of age

karl malone has had playoffs where he has shot pretty poorly(7 postseasons where he shot .438 or lower,) , especially considering stockton was his point guard(all-time leader in assists) and spoon fed him several easy attempts a game through their vaunted pick and roll. ....not to mention the early exits in which the jazz had homecourt advantage ....all this while not being nearly the defender/rebounder/passer or even shooter garnett was .

malone shot .438 while getting knocked out in the 1st round against the suns in 1990 being guarded by tom chambers who was nobody's idea of a good defender(nicknamed tommy gun because he liked to put them shots up)

i think there is a lot of karl malone's history that says he does match up favorably to kevin garnett.

which is not to say he wasnt a great player in his own right , but he came up short a lot , he had an excellent longevity of greatness but at his best he was not better than garnett at garnett's best.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

edabomb said:


> Wow.
> 
> For one - KG cannot hold a torch to Timmy D when it comes to low post offense.


Based on what?


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

based on volume and efficiency -not to mention clear cut eye-test - someone earlier mentioned that KG had an unstoppable post move- that's baloney, never was


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

e-monk said:


> based on volume and efficiency -not to mention clear cut eye-test - someone earlier mentioned that KG had an unstoppable post move- that's baloney, never was


garnett's turnaround was indefensible if he got it up due to his height, leaping ability, technique...whether he made it or not is another story , he almost always in addition to an uncontested shot got a clear line of vision to the hoop.

his main issue was getting enough space to properly set it up....you could crowd him with a double team into not taking it, and he would simply pass out to the open man.


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

A quick response no time).



Da Grinch said:


> if you judged malone like you do garnett i dont think you'd see it that way


I don't think so.
Karl Malone had an extraordinary consistency in his high level of play. And as the Franchise player and go-to guy.
Malone was, like 14 straigh times and All-Nba and 13 straight times a 1st teamer. Don't really know if it's a record, but it's pretty amazing.
He also had 17 straight seasons scoring over 20ppg and never missed the playoffs in his career. Another pretty amazing feat.

Keep in mind that since his rookie year (when he played with crap (for that era) - Rickie Green, Hansen, Bailey, Eaton) till when he was 38 years old (playing again with crap - Stockton, Russell, Kirilenko and Collins) he was always a +20ppg scorer and go-to guy on the playoffs. 

In his prime, not only Malone never missed the playoffs, he only got booted in the 1st round by a loaded Suns team, the to-be World champions Rockets and the Mullin - Richmond Warriors (a clunker by the Jazz, with Malone still going for 30/16 on .500FG% in the series)



> karl malone played with a HOF pg throughout his prime as well as other standout players and didnt get anywhere until his western conference contemporaries (,magic ,worthy, robinson,olajuwon, drexler and barkley) faded due to injuries and age , getting his 2 finals appearances before the new crop (kobe, garnett duncan, sheed) came of age


Stockton is an hof due to his amazing consistency and (obviously) great passing. But at this prime Stockton was in the same tier of players than Timmy, KJ and Payton (who played in the West), Penny and Kidd. 
Stockton was a great player, yes. But he was not heads and shoulders above his competition. 



> karl malone has had playoffs where he has shot pretty poorly(7 postseasons where he shot .438 or lower,) , especially considering stockton was his point guard(all-time leader in assists) and spoon fed him several easy attempts a game through their vaunted pick and roll. ....not to mention the early exits in which the jazz had homecourt advantage ....all this while not being nearly the defender/rebounder/passer or even shooter garnett was.
> 
> malone shot .438 while getting knocked out in the 1st round against the suns in 1990 being guarded by tom chambers who was nobody's idea of a good defender(nicknamed tommy gun because he liked to put them shots up)


Malone had trouble in the playoffs shooting (and scoring). True. 
Sometimes it happens when you are the primary scorer and go-to guy and other teams plan their defense around you. And not in the perimeter.

That Suns team was leaded. Chambers, KJ, Horny, Thunder Dan, Fast Eddie... Malone went to battle with Hansen and Eaton on the starting 5. And Stockton scored poorly.

But Malone never missed the playoffs three straight seasons in his prime! 



> i think there is a lot of karl malone's history that says he does match up favorably to kevin garnett.
> 
> which is not to say he wasnt a great player in his own right , but he came up short a lot , he had an excellent longevity of greatness but at his best he was not better than garnett at garnett's best.


For more than a decade and a half Karl malone was the best or second best PF in the League. A two-time MVP when Jordan was playing. Even made All-D teams. For 13 seasons a top-5 scorer in the league.

And even at age 40 he was battling KG in the playoffs making him play significantly worse...


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

Peak wise it's not such a bad argument. I'd take Garnett on a peak night during his prime over Duncan on a peak night during his prime. Longevity and consistency gives it to Duncan no question, but if you were to take one player for one night during their respective primes I might be inclined to snag Garnett.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

PauloCatarino said:


> A quick response no time).
> 
> 
> 
> ...


everyone acknowledges his longevity ..



> Keep in mind that since his rookie year (when he played with crap (for that era) - Rickie Green, Hansen, Bailey, Eaton) till when he was 38 years old (playing again with crap - Stockton, Russell, Kirilenko and Collins) he was always a +20ppg scorer and go-to guy on the playoffs.
> 
> In his prime, not only Malone never missed the playoffs, he only got booted in the 1st round by a loaded Suns team, the to-be World champions Rockets and the Mullin - Richmond Warriors (a clunker by the Jazz, with Malone still going for 30/16 on .500FG% in the series)


the jazz made the 2nd round of the playoffs the 2 prior seasons before drafting karl malone 

he was a mid round pick(13th in a 26 team league). so all this talk about how crappy his team was sounds silly , he played with another hall of famer in his prime the entire time

in his prime he got swept by the warrors while being guarded primarily by 6'7 200 lbs rod higgins

also the sonics in addition to the rockets and suns 





> Stockton is an hof due to his amazing consistency and (obviously) great passing. But at this prime Stockton was in the same tier of players than Timmy, KJ and Payton (who played in the West), Penny and Kidd.
> Stockton was a great player, yes. But he was not heads and shoulders above his competition.


the same could be said for karl malone and the bigs of his time(barkley, kemp , olajuwon, robinson etc)




> Malone had trouble in the playoffs shooting (and scoring). True.
> Sometimes it happens when you are the primary scorer and go-to guy and other teams plan their defense around you. And not in the perimeter.
> 
> That Suns team was leaded. Chambers, KJ, Horny, Thunder Dan, Fast Eddie... Malone went to battle with Hansen and Eaton on the starting 5. And Stockton scored poorly.
> ...


scoring the ball is his main advantage over garnett and it failed him regularly in the playoffs ...this thread is 8 pages long and the next post talking about how kg's defense failed him at any point will be the 1st.

its kind of simple karl malone is a great player with serious longevity 

but kevin garnett was at his peak a better player than karl malone ever was 





> For more than a decade and a half Karl malone was the best or second best PF in the League. A two-time MVP when Jordan was playing. Even made All-D teams. For 13 seasons a top-5 scorer in the league.
> 
> And even at age 40 he was battling KG in the playoffs making him play significantly worse...


all giving malone an mvp when he was clearly not as valuabe or as good as jordan simply diminished the value of the award.


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

Da Grinch said:


> everyone acknowledges his longevity ..
> 
> 
> 
> the jazz made the 2nd round of the playoffs the 2 prior seasons before drafting karl malone


You DO know that team had Adrian Dantley (another all-time great) and Dr. Dunkenstein as a 20ppg scorer, right?
In Malone's rookie year Dantley was traded end-regular season and Griffith missed the season (and was never the same again)



> he was a mid round pick(13th in a 26 team league). so all this talk about how crappy his team was sounds silly , he played with another hall of famer in his prime the entire time


Malone's second season (post-Dantley):
PG - Rickie Green;
SG - Bob Hansen;
SF - Kelly Tripucka;
C - Mark Eaton.

Is this not "crap"?? In the 80's? 
And Stockton only became an All-Nbaer in 1988-1989 (Malone's fourth season in).



> in his prime he got swept by the warrors while being guarded primarily by 6'7 200 lbs rod higgins


Sure. And in his prime KG didnt make it to the playoffs three straight seasons.

Also, isn't it of note that in Malon'e rookie seaason he already was the team's main offensive weapon in the playoffs? 
Cause in the first couple of trips to the playoffs Minny had Googs as the main scorer...



> also the sonics in addition to the rockets and suns


Already adressed the Rockets and Suns. 
And that Sonics team (again, a loaded team) went to the 7th game of the Western Finals.



> the same could be said for karl malone and the bigs of his time(barkley, kemp , olajuwon, robinson etc)


I was talking about PGs. Talking solely PFs, there's no way there were multiple PFs at Malone's level. There was Barkley, and then Duncan/KG.

If you're willing to say that Shawn Kemp was Karl Malone's equal, teh conversation ends right here.



> scoring the ball is his main advantage over garnett and it failed him regularly in the playoffs ...this thread is 8 pages long and the next post talking about how kg's defense failed him at any point will be the 1st.
> 
> its kind of simple karl malone is a great player with serious longevity
> 
> but kevin garnett was at his peak a better player than karl malone ever was


That's your opinion. You are entitled (sp?) to it.
Even if you are wrong. And you are wrong on this one.
Karl Malone was a franchise player and go-to guy on offense that carried his team to the Finals twice. And to the playoffs EVERY SEASON he played in Utah.
KG never did that. Never came CLOSE to do that.
KG always had to have someone who would bail him out when things got tough, scoring-wise.
When paired with good players, KG's stats took a dip. Malone played with Stockton and still delivered amazing offensive stats.
Garnett's stats were inflated in Minny.

Yes, KG was a better defender than Malone. But individual defense is overrated. Please provide a link (any link) to the notion that Karl Malone's defense was ever subpar, or hurt the team, or whatever.



> all giving malone an mvp when he was clearly not as valuabe or as good as jordan simply diminished the value of the award.


lol. And KG was that merited of the award that he is the sole MVP to not make it to the playoffs the season after he won the award. The three next seasons, as a matter of fact.


----------



## CelticsMan (Aug 28, 2015)

Hibachi! said:


> Peak wise it's not such a bad argument. I'd take Garnett on a peak night during his prime over Duncan on a peak night during his prime. Longevity and consistency gives it to Duncan no question, but if you were to take one player for one night during their respective primes I might be inclined to snag Garnett.


Everyone likes to point at longevity but I don't get that because Garnett was great for a good 17 years while Duncan has had 18, give or take for both. I feel like people like to think Duncan has better longevity because he faded before Duncan, even though he started earlier.


----------



## XxIrvingxX (Apr 23, 2012)

CelticsMan said:


> Everyone likes to point at longevity but I don't get that because Garnett was great for a good 17 years while Duncan has had 18, give or take for both. I feel like people like to think Duncan has better longevity because he faded before Duncan, even though he started earlier.


Tim Duncan was an all NBA defensive team member in his rookie year. In fact if I remember correctly he was able to get 20+ rebounds the first time he went up against Dennis Rodman, didn't he?. This past year he was still a major piece of a very good spurs team. Kevin Garnett is a shell of his former self and isn't making any major contributions to a horrible Timberwolves team apart from jersey sales. It's a small example, but it basically tells the entire story. 

I really don't get what part of this you aren't understanding. It's really simple.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

um Karl Malone wasn't just 'not a sub par defender' he was an elite positional defender with a lifetime 101 Drtg and multiple All NBA defensive team honors to his name


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

XxIrvingxX said:


> In fact if I remember correctly he was able to get 20+ rebounds the first time he went up against Dennis Rodman, didn't he?.


I'm sure you remember watching that vividly. That is not something you read.


----------



## XxIrvingxX (Apr 23, 2012)

Jamel Irief said:


> I'm sure you remember watching that vividly. That is not something you read.


Or maybe my neighbor told me


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

e-monk said:


> based on volume and efficiency -not to mention clear cut eye-test - someone earlier mentioned that KG had an unstoppable post move- that's baloney, never was


Umm KG's turnaround fade was pretty much great. Just as good as TD's bank shot or Dirk's one leg turn around J. I am not sure you watched much KG, especially in his prime. Forget the turn around J, guy was a pretty good shooter from anywhere in the arc. 

As for TD being an all NBA rookie in his first year, should we also discount the fact that he played with a top 50 player of all time that season?

Heck TD has had the luxury of playing with a couple of HOFers. Not even taking into account how Leonard might pan out, or where Aldridge's career goes from here.

KG didn't have that until he got to Boston

And since the initial post was about defense, man I have seen numerous plays where players can't get a shot off against KG. Watch his feet, the guy's one of the most mobile bigs to ever play the game.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

HB said:


> Umm KG's turnaround fade was pretty much great. Just as good as TD's bank shot or Dirk's one leg turn around J. I am not sure you watched much KG, especially in his prime. Forget the turn around J, guy was a pretty good shooter from anywhere in the arc.
> 
> As for TD being an all NBA rookie in his first year, should we also discount the fact that he played with a top 50 player of all time that season?
> 
> ...


You bring up Duncan playing with Aldridge and Leonard, and on the other hand say KG didn't play with anyone great until Boston? Do you want me to bring up why that doesn't make any sense?


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

R-Star said:


> You bring up Duncan playing with Aldridge and Leonard, and on the other hand say KG didn't play with anyone great until Boston? Do you want me to bring up why that doesn't make any sense?


Have you not been reading his posts? Before KG got to boston Fred Hoiberg and Sam Mitchell were the two best players he played with.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Jamel Irief said:


> Have you not been reading his posts? Before KG got to boston Fred Hoiberg and Sam Mitchell were the two best players he played with.


Nduidi Ebi was pretty solid as well. 

Has anyone brought up the fact he played with the Starchild for multiple seasons? And why is Wally Szczerbiak being played out like a punk in this thread? That's like **** talking Kyle Korver on last years ATL team. Wally was very good while in Minny. 


And the bottom line is, if KG would have thrown a little cash to Spree to help feed his starving children, he could have had multiple titles. That's what KG will be remembered for. That and consistently picking the smallest players on the court to try to start fights with, then run away as fast as possible while doing the "hold me back, hold me back!"


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

R-Star said:


> You bring up Duncan playing with Aldridge and Leonard, and on the other hand say KG didn't play with anyone great until Boston? Do you want me to bring up why that doesn't make any sense?


Sigh

The post CLEARLY said NOT TAKING INTO ACCOUNT so and so players ... but hey whatever floats your boat.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

HB said:


> Sigh
> 
> The post CLEARLY said NOT TAKING INTO ACCOUNT so and so players ... but hey whatever floats your boat.


Why even write it then? It's asinine. You're being an idiot. So don't ****ing sigh me you jackass. You're the one with a thread full of people scratching their heads and laughing at the stupid **** coming out of your mouth.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

R-Star said:


> Why even write it then? It's asinine. You're being an idiot. So don't ****ing sigh me you jackass. You're the one with a thread full of people scratching their heads and laughing at the stupid **** coming out of your mouth.


I just started laughing man. Even before you responded I knew you would type up some bs. 

Its okay bro, whatever floats your boat for real. I am not even sure you understood what I was talking about, but here's a hint ... TD has and continues to play with great players. You know, that sort of thing helps win games, heck sometimes it even helps win championships.

Not sure why I tried to explain it to you, but maybe that will sink in better than the other post.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

HB said:


> I just started laughing man. Even before you responded I knew you would type up some bs.
> 
> Its okay bro, whatever floats your boat for real. I am not even sure you understood what I was talking about, but here's a hint ... TD has and continues to play with great players. You know, that sort of thing helps win games, heck sometimes it even helps win championships.
> 
> Not sure why I tried to explain it to you, but maybe that will sink in better than the other post.


And KG has floated around to 4 teams now (well 3 but....), and will go down in history for being a major reason the Nets are probably the biggest laughing stock of a franchise for this decade. 

"Tried to explain"......, thats priceless you ****ing clueless idiot.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

R-Star said:


> And KG has floated around to 4 teams now, and will go down in history for being a major reason the Nets are probably the biggest laughing stock of a franchise for this decade.
> 
> "Tried to explain"......, that priceless you ****ing clueless idiot.


Bro, what's the issue here? Why are you so agitated? What's up with all the cussing? I swear some of you really take this stuff way too seriously. Can you make a point without spazzing all over your keyboard?

Fine, you don't like KG, that's cool. Heck I don't even think he's the best PF of all time. He will go down as one of the greats of all time whether you like it or not though. The Nets are a badly run franchise period, that has nothing to do with KG. 

Seriously, if you need to come on a message board to act all tough, you've got bigger issues than English comprehension my friend. Seek help.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

HB said:


> Bro, what's the issue here? Why are you so agitated? What's up with all the cussing? I swear some of you really take this stuff way too seriously. Can you make a point without spazzing all over your keyboard?
> 
> Fine, you don't like KG, that's cool. Heck I don't even think he's the best PF of all time. He will go down as one of the greats of all time whether you like it or not though. The Nets are a badly run franchise period, that has nothing to do with KG.
> 
> Seriously, if you need to come on a message board to act all tough, you've got bigger issues than English comprehension my friend. Seek help.


Buddy, you have been known for years for being one of the dumbest posters to ever grace the forum. You even left for years because of it. It's funny you **** talk the Nets now, because I remember you trying to tell everyone Vince Carter was the greatest basketball player of all time when he played for them. 

Is KG one of the all time great PF's? Absolutely. Anyone saying he isn't a top 10, arguably top 5 is someone I don't see eye to eye with. 

You can quit with all the "If you need to act tough on a message board...." sorry champ, but if telling you you're saying something stupid when you say something stupid equates to me acting tough in your books, that's your problem, not mine.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

R-Star said:


> Buddy, you have been known for years for being one of the dumbest posters to ever grace the forum. You even left for years because of it. It's funny you **** talk the Nets now, because I remember you trying to tell everyone Vince Carter was the greatest basketball player of all time when he played for them.
> 
> Is KG one of the all time great PF's? Absolutely. Anyone saying he isn't a top 10, arguably top 5 is someone I don't see eye to eye with.
> 
> You can quit with all the "If you need to act tough on a message board...." sorry champ, but if telling you you're saying something stupid when you say something stupid equates to me acting tough in your books, that's your problem, not mine.


Hey I'll admit, I have had my fair share of blunders on this wee forum. But do you really believe anyone takes you seriously on here? See I can walk away from this because I don't need this site to validate me, but I wonder if you can. 

And that my friend is really disturbing. 

Half the time you don't even understand what's going on. You cover that up with this tough guy shtick, that not only is it old, but its extremely clownish as well. 

Oh well like I said, whatever floats your boat. I have probably devoted more time to this than need be. Peace!


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

And for those who really want to stay on topic

How about this *article*, showcasing how KG at 38 is still a nightmare on defense. Now imagine him in his prime when he could guard multiple positions.

Ask yourself this, on any given night, since you've been watching the league, how many times have you ever seen the man take a play off?


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

HB said:


> Hey I'll admit, I have had my fair share of blunders on this wee forum. But do you really believe anyone takes you seriously on here? See I can walk away from this because I don't need this site to validate me, but I wonder if you can.
> 
> And that my friend is really disturbing.
> 
> ...


How many times can you say "whatever floats your boat" in sequential posts?

Also, your post is kind of humorous because I've left before. The difference is I was asked to come back. 

For you to say I don't even understand what you're posting is probably true. No one does. Why dont you talk about how Sam Cassell or Sprewell were no good when they played with KG again? 

You never know what you're talking about man. It's the only consistent thing about you.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

HB said:


> And for those who really want to stay on topic
> 
> How about this *article*, showcasing how KG at 38 is still a nightmare on defense. Now imagine him in his prime when he could guard multiple positions.
> 
> Ask yourself this, on any given night, since you've been watching the league, how many times have you ever seen the man take a play off?


More times than I've seen Tim Duncan take one off?


----------



## GNG (Aug 17, 2002)

R-Star said:


> Why even write it then? It's asinine. You're being an idiot. So don't ****ing sigh me you jackass. You're the one with a thread full of people scratching their heads and laughing at the stupid **** coming out of your mouth.


"Anyhoo..."


----------



## jericho (Jul 12, 2002)

I'm pretty sure this thread would have ended dozens of posts ago if there anything real going on in the NBA.


----------



## CelticsMan (Aug 28, 2015)

R-Star said:


> And KG has floated around to 4 teams now (well 3 but....), and will go down in history for being a major reason the Nets are probably the biggest laughing stock of a franchise for this decade.
> 
> "Tried to explain"......, thats priceless you ****ing clueless idiot.


Nets sucking is KG's fault? I'm sorry, he's a major reason? Did he ask to get traded to Brooklyn? Did he tell them to give up their picks for the next 4 years? Was it his idea for them to pick up 3 guys that are older than 35?

That comment makes no sense.


----------



## CelticsMan (Aug 28, 2015)

XxIrvingxX said:


> Tim Duncan was an all NBA defensive team member in his rookie year. In fact if I remember correctly he was able to get 20+ rebounds the first time he went up against Dennis Rodman, didn't he?. This past year he was still a major piece of a very good spurs team. Kevin Garnett is a shell of his former self and isn't making any major contributions to a horrible Timberwolves team apart from jersey sales. It's a small example, but it basically tells the entire story.
> 
> I really don't get what part of this you aren't understanding. It's really simple.


Notice how I said 17 and not 20. He was done in 2012 or 2013 and has just been collecting paychecks since then. The story preluding the NBA finals in '12 was Garnett and Duncan's visit to the Fountain of Youth and how great they both still were. Duncan's run has been 1 year longer than that and his last stat line was 13 and 9. He's putting up Jordan Hill numbers, I don't see him going so much farther than last year.

He's actually a huge veteran presence in Minnesota and is meant to mentor KAT and Wiggins along with other guys. Half a years and his teammates were already telling stories of how he was running the locker room. Kinda unrelated but just to make the point that he's doing more than Jersey sales.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

PauloCatarino said:


> A quick response no time).
> 
> 
> 
> ...


most of the things karl has on kevin are longevity and popularity stats 

at their respective peaks kevin garnett ranks higher 

despite the mvp's Malone was never seen as the best player in the league by anyone ....the year garnett won a lot of people did see him as the best over shaq kobe and yes Duncan.

in PER garnett has the highest peak of either player , he has the highest rebounding , assists ,blocks, , he was a better man defender and team defender , a better leader 

so at their respective peaks he was better the tangibles as well as the intangibles 

since you were so dismissive of shawn kemp and believe karl Malone's defense is above being besmirched i'll alert you to the sonics-jazz series in 1996 in which kemp shot 69% from the field (.739 TS%) all the while karl Malone constantly choked at the line costing them at least 2 of the games

it would seem his defense had a hand in kemp's extreme efficiency

http://www.basketball-reference.com...rn-conference-finals-jazz-vs-supersonics.html


----------



## CelticsMan (Aug 28, 2015)

bump


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

Give me Duncan or give me death.


----------



## JusticeWhiteside (Nov 22, 2015)

Duncan without question.

Also Duncans peak was better than KG's as well.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

CelticsMan said:


> bump


why on earth wouldn't you want us all to forget this and all the stupidity herein....? The answer is still clearly Duncan


----------



## Sir Patchwork (Jan 12, 2005)

I don't remember if I responded on this thread or not, but I will say that I don't think it's a landslide. Duncan has a distinct advantage, but not a big one. Kevin Garnett was a monster on both ends of the court. I might take him as the 2nd best PF ever, even above Malone.


----------



## LawnwoodAMS (Jan 20, 2016)

I'd rather have Duncan.


----------



## XxIrvingxX (Apr 23, 2012)

LawnwoodAMS said:


> I'd rather have Duncan.


I wonder what this guy did to warrant the ban hammer...


----------



## CelticsMan (Aug 28, 2015)

e-monk said:


> why on earth wouldn't you want us all to forget this and all the stupidity herein....? The answer is still clearly Duncan


I was looking back at it and wanted to hear opinions of more people now that the forum is more active... 

You can't name a weakness of prime KG.


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

CelticsMan said:


> I was looking back at it and wanted to hear opinions of more people now that the forum is more active...
> 
> *You can't name a weakness of prime KG.*


Please re-read the thread, young grasshopper...


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

CelticsMan said:


> I was looking back at it and wanted to hear opinions of more people now that the forum is more active...
> 
> You can't name a weakness of prime KG.


sure I can: not so hot in the post, mediocre efg for an interior player, not so clutch, kind of a punk - it's actually all in this thread already which is why I reiterate ,why on earth did you want to remind people of this dumb thread?


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

e-monk said:


> sure I can: *not so hot in the post, mediocre efg for an interior player*, not so clutch, kind of a punk - it's actually all in this thread already which is why I reiterate ,why on earth did you want to remind people of this dumb thread?


Kevin Garnett?

His career eFG is .501. Duncan's is .507. 

As for post play, that guy has some of the best footwork I have ever seen by a big from any era. I'll take him in the post over most bigs that have played the game at any point in time.

I didn't bold the clutch part, I think that's subjective. He's made a lot of big plays in the clutch, both offensively and defensively. He's also missed a lot as well, that's what comes with being a prime player.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

sorry, you're wrong (but I'm not going to rehash tired shit that's already been stated repeatedly over the last 11 pages in this thread)


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Lol at I am wrong. 

Thank God for things like eFG and TS%.

For those who don't care too much about stats, here's a clip of KG going to work in the post. No need to respond by the way


----------



## lilbballboy (Jan 22, 2016)

I'd say he's top 5 for sure, number 1 is an asinine claim though.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

I mean, he was the co-#1 option on a title team in the same year he won DPOY. I don't mind someone preferring Duncan (I'm one of those people), but he's right there with the rest of the guys in the not-Duncan tier.


----------



## B.A. Ware (Jan 23, 2016)

CelticsMan said:


> I was looking back at it and wanted to hear opinions of more people now that the forum is more active...
> 
> You can't name a weakness of prime KG.


Easy. He won no rings in his prime......

OK that was kind of a cheap shot but the bottom line is you need to demonstrate KG is the best PF of all time by using *facts and statistics*.

You haven't done that yet.


----------



## CelticsMan (Aug 28, 2015)

B.A. Ware said:


> Easy. He won no rings in his prime......
> 
> OK that was kind of a cheap shot but the bottom line is you need to demonstrate KG is the best PF of all time by using *facts and statistics*.
> 
> You haven't done that yet.


Since when is no rings a weakness? And did 2008 not happen? If you saying that wasn't his prime... you didn't watch that team...

Facts and stats? Have you looked at the first post in the thread?


----------



## CelticsMan (Aug 28, 2015)

lilbballboy said:


> I'd say he's top 5 for sure, *number 1 is an asinine claim though.*


Why though? He's easily the best all around PF. Only person you can really argue better is Duncan. Dirk didn't have defense, Malone had Stockton who made him better. Barkley wasn't the defender KG was, neither was McHale. I say he's at least Top 3 for sure. And arguable for top 1.


----------



## CelticsMan (Aug 28, 2015)

e-monk said:


> sure I can: not so hot in the post, mediocre efg for an interior player, not so clutch, kind of a punk - it's actually all in this thread already which is why I reiterate ,why on earth did you want to remind people of this dumb thread?


-Someone already replied with video of his great post game 
-Someone already replied with stats of better eFG% than DUNCAN
-"kinda of a punk" Not even gonna dignify that with a response.
-"Not so clutch"
Love that you said this, found this post on a realgm forum about this. 

"From another thread http://www.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=64&t=935203, here are Duncan's and Garnett's clutch stats since 2002-03 when 82games.com started tracking this stat (according to 82games.com, "clutch" is defined as 4th quarter or overtime, game within 5 points either way):

2002-03: Garnett 30.4 points/48 min on 53% EFG; Duncan 33.1 points, 49%
2003-04: Garnett 34.8 points/48 min on 47% EFG; Duncan 33.2 points, 41%
2004-05: Garnett 32.1 points/48 min on 48% EFG; Duncan 29.9 on 40%
2005-06: Garnett 32.2 points/48 min on 42% EFG; Duncan 27.8 on 40%
2006-07: Garnett 25.2 points/48 min on 39% EFG; Duncan 33.2 on 58%
2007-08: Garnett 21.1 points/48 min on 41% EFG; Duncan 27.7 on 53%
2008-09: Garnett 25.5 points/48 min on 65% EFG; Duncan 27.8 on 47%

*Totals *: KG: 28.8 points on 48%; Duncan: 30.4 points on 47%

Garnett and Duncan score at the same volume on the same percentages in clutch time situations. Where they're doing it from isn't as important as the result, which is almost identical."


So I just continue to wonder why putting KG over Duncan is so outlandish when KG matches, is close to, or is ahead in every category. Other than the fact that he's a Spurs player with 5 rings and that apparently makes him untouchable.


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

CelticsMan said:


> Why though? He's easily the best all around PF. Only person you can really argue better is Duncan. Dirk didn't have defense, Malone had Stockton who made him better. Barkley wasn't the defender KG was, neither was McHale. I say he's at least Top 3 for sure. And arguable for top 1.


Dude, for the last time: 

"Best all around PF" doesn't mean dick. Who the hell cares that your PF is averaging 5apg if he isn't scoring +25ppg (like, you know, a guy like Karl Malone did for numerous seasons)? If you have a dominant scorer in the PF slot why would you want him to pass up shots?

Duncan? Dude, Timmay was the cornerstone for 5 championship teams. FIVE! You put your average Joe alongside Duncan and it's a mattter of time they make the Finals!

KG is contending with guys like Barkley, Dirk and Petitt. NOT Duncan and/or Malone.


----------



## CelticsMan (Aug 28, 2015)

PauloCatarino said:


> Dude, for the last time:
> 
> "Best all around PF" doesn't mean dick. Who the hell cares that your PF is averaging 5apg if he isn't scoring +25ppg (like, you know, a guy like Karl Malone did for numerous seasons)? If you have a dominant scorer in the PF slot why would you want him to pass up shots?
> 
> ...


Kobe in the Kwame era was a prime example of how just being a dominant scorer can't lead a team when you're on your own. That's why 04-07 Kobe didn't make it past the 1st round, and missed the playoffs once in that era, and KG got to the WCF, because he got his teammates involved. It's really not all about scoring. 24 ppg + 6 apg is 36 points being created (ignoring 3's and shots leading to fouls). 30ppg + 3 apg(normal for PF) is also 36 points created a game.... Why does it matter if he is the one scoring when he is still creating an extremely high amount of points for his team as a Big Man??

Malone had Stockton. Tons of easy baskets. Rondo in the 2012 playoffs worked a lot with KG (36 yr old) and got him to about 20 and 10 a game... Let prime KG have a Rondo type player and tell me that he won't average a lot more points if he could do that at 36yrs with a passing PG.... 

Ginobli was the arguable best player in the 05 finals
Duncan got held down by the Cavs bigs in 07, Parker carried
Kawhi and Parker were the main guys in 13 and 14.

Cornerstone or just really good team? You realize Duncan was a missed Horry shot away from never beating Kobe in the playoffs? Yet put any average guy on his team and he wins a ring?


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

PauloCatarino said:


> Dude, for the last time:
> 
> "Best all around PF" doesn't mean dick. Who the hell cares that your PF is averaging 5apg if he isn't scoring +25ppg (like, you know, a guy like Karl Malone did for numerous seasons)? If you have a dominant scorer in the PF slot why would you want him to pass up shots?
> 
> ...


I got Duncan for #1 , so I'm not arguing him, but quite simply Garnett was the best player and a featured scorer on a title team and Malone wasn't. I honestly don't think Malone's a guy who's clear-cut in a tier above KG.


----------



## B.A. Ware (Jan 23, 2016)

CelticsMan said:


> Since when is no rings a weakness? And did 2008 not happen? If you saying that wasn't his prime... you didn't watch that team...
> 
> Facts and stats? Have you looked at the first post in the thread?


Yes but that's not stats and facts, it's basically an opinion that may have some truth.

I'm talking stats and facts like this: 
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/g/garneke01.html

Ultimately it's hard to say if he's the best of all time, but he'd certainly be in consideration for it.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

Bogg said:


> I got Duncan for #1 , so I'm not arguing him, but quite simply Garnett was the best player and a featured scorer on a title team and Malone wasn't. I honestly don't think Malone's a guy who's clear-cut in a tier above KG.


this is kind of disingenuous given the way that team was constructed - especially the "featured scorer" part - KG averaged like 18 ppg with two other guys doing more or less the same and Pierce (not KG) was their clutch go-to guy - this is not quite "the glove won a title with the heat" but we're talking about an ensemble effort and we're clearly not talking The Kid in his prime

meanwhile at roughly the same age the Mail Man lead his team to back to back finals averaging 27ppg on mid 50s efg (that's a featured scorer) only to lose to what many consider the greatest team of all time


----------



## XxIrvingxX (Apr 23, 2012)

CelticsMan said:


> Kobe in the Kwame era was a prime example of how just being a dominant scorer can't lead a team when you're on your own. That's why 04-07 Kobe didn't make it past the 1st round, and missed the playoffs once in that era, and KG got to the WCF, because he got his teammates involved.


KG got past the first round because he had a decent supporting cast. Kobe didn't. Kobe's scoring was the reason the Lakers were able to make the playoffs to begin with.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

e-monk said:


> this is kind of disingenuous given the way that team was constructed - especially the "featured scorer" part - KG averaged like 18 ppg with two other guys doing more or less the same and Pierce (not KG) was their clutch go-to guy - this is not quite "the glove won a title with the heat" but we're talking about an ensemble effort and we're clearly not talking The Kid in his prime
> 
> meanwhile at roughly the same age the Mail Man lead his team to back to back finals averaging 27ppg on mid 50s efg (that's a featured scorer) only to lose to what many consider the greatest team of all time


I don't think it's disingenuous at all - if someone's going to say that Malone's clearly a tier above KG, I'm going to point out that only one of them was the best player on a title team. Malone was the better scorer, sure, but KG was the better defensive player (which isn't a knock on Malon's defense, but Garnett's one of the best ever on that end) and still a 20ppg guy himself - we're not talking a Moutombo-type anchor, he was a complete player. I'm not quite sure how you can say that KG was clearly past his prime that year, considering that he won the DPOY, made first-team all-NBA, first-team defense, finished third in MVP voting, and led the Celtics in scoring (by less than 1ppg, but still) and rebounding during the postseason en route to a title. 

I think the problem is that people mostly remember the 2010-2013 version of KG, after he blew out his knee and came back as a different guy, as "Celtics KG". However, in the one full year he had in Boston before blowing out his knee, Garnett was absolutely still one of the best individual players in the league. 

Also, keep in mind, I'm simply arguing that KG and Malone are a part of a relatively big second tier of power forwards below Duncan, not that KG's the best ever at the position.


----------



## CelticsMan (Aug 28, 2015)

Bogg said:


> I don't think it's disingenuous at all - if someone's going to say that Malone's clearly a tier above KG, I'm going to point out that only one of them was the best player on a title team. Malone was the better scorer, sure, but KG was the better defensive player (which isn't a knock on Malon's defense, but Garnett's one of the best ever on that end) and still a 20ppg guy himself - we're not talking a Moutombo-type anchor, he was a complete player. I'm not quite sure how you can say that KG was clearly past his prime that year, considering that he won the DPOY, made first-team all-NBA, first-team defense, finished third in MVP voting, and led the Celtics in scoring (by less than 1ppg, but still) and rebounding during the postseason en route to a title.
> 
> I think the problem is that people mostly remember the 2010-2013 version of KG, after he blew out his knee and came back as a different guy, as "Celtics KG". However, in the one full year he had in Boston before blowing out his knee, Garnett was absolutely still one of the best individual players in the league.
> 
> Also, keep in mind, I'm simply arguing that KG and Malone are a part of a relatively big second tier of power forwards below Duncan, not that KG's the best ever at the position.


A great passing PG makes most already great bigs even better. That 2010-2013 KG was made better by Rondo especially in the 2012 playoff run. Same with Malone and Stock. Malone scored a LOT more because of Stock,

KG was still prime until the knee injury.


----------



## lilbballboy (Jan 22, 2016)

CelticsMan said:


> Why though? He's easily the best all around PF. Only person you can really argue better is Duncan. Dirk didn't have defense, Malone had Stockton who made him better. Barkley wasn't the defender KG was, neither was McHale. I say he's at least Top 3 for sure. And arguable for top 1.


lol @ padding stats on teams that couldn't get out of the second round. I'd put Duncan, Malone, Dirk all in front of him.


----------



## XxIrvingxX (Apr 23, 2012)

lilbballboy said:


> lol @ padding stats on teams that couldn't get out of the second round. I'd put Duncan, Malone, Dirk all in front of him.


I personally would take Garnett over Dirk any day. The other two I agree with.


----------



## e-monk (Sep 10, 2010)

Bogg said:


> I'm not quite sure how you can say that KG was clearly past his prime that year, considering that he won the DPOY, made first-team all-NBA, first-team defense, finished third in MVP voting, and led the Celtics in scoring (by less than 1ppg, but still) and rebounding during the postseason en route to a title.


because he was 33, averaged just 30 mpg - no matter how good he was that season he was not at the level he had been in his mid to late 20s - it's not a knock, he just wasn't as good as he had been which was still pretty great


----------

