1963 Wilt vs 2007 Garnett

[70sFan]

Which player is better, when you compare their worst seasons in his primes team record-wise? Explain your choice

[feyki]

I guess Wilt has the highest PER with 63 season . That means he had great scoring year and with goat level rebounding and about same level defence as KG .

KG's 2007 was a bit worse than his 08 . 08 wouldn't come close to 63 Wilt , let alone 07 .

[JordansBulls]

Wilt no doubt about it. 2007 KG didnt even get in the playoffs.

[Ballerhogger]

I guess Wilt has the highest PER with 63 season . That means he had great scoring year and with goat level rebounding and about same level defence as KG .

KG's 2007 was a bit worse than his 08 . 08 wouldn't come close to 63 Wilt , let alone 07 .

agreed.

[Quotatious]

Wilt no doubt about it. 2007 KG didnt even get in the playoffs.

Neither did Wilt, that's why 70sFan compared those versions here.

Actually, Wilt's team had an even worse record than Kevin's team. Garnett's Timberwolves went 32-50, Chamberlain's Warriors went 31-49. To be more accurate, KG's team went 32-44 when he played, but he missed 6 games. His team lost all 6 games he missed.

That being said, I would take Wilt here. I think 1963 Wilt vs 2005 KG would be a better comparison (I would prefer '05 KG over '63 Wilt, so to me it's '05 KG > '63 Wilt > '07 KG).

[Quotatious]

I guess Wilt has the highest PER with 63 season . That means he had great scoring year and with goat level rebounding and about same level defence as KG .

KG's 2007 was a bit worse than his 08 . 08 wouldn't come close to 63 Wilt , let alone 07 .

What you said suggests that you think '08 KG was better than '07, but why would that be the case? It's a totally obvious case of winning bias skewing people's perception of players - '07 KG would've led the '08 Celtics to a better record than '08 KG did. Nothing about Garnett changed in a positive way between '07 and '08 other than having far better teammates. Individually, he was slightly better (and more durable/with better stamina) in '07.

[feyki]

I guess Wilt has the highest PER with 63 season . That means he had great scoring year and with goat level rebounding and about same level defence as KG .

KG's 2007 was a bit worse than his 08 . 08 wouldn't come close to 63 Wilt , let alone 07 .

What you said suggests that you think '08 KG was better than '07, but why would that be the case? It's a totally obvious case of winning bias skewing people's perception of players - '07 KG would've led the '08 Celtics to a better record than '08 KG did. Nothing about Garnett changed in a positive way between '07 and '08 other than having far better teammates. Individually, he was slightly better (and more durable/with better stamina) in '07.

Individually , he was better in 08 . On 100 poss , He had %4.5 better TS and better defensive numbers for his 2008 than 2007 . He only had two more defensive rebounds for 2007 . Beside of those three , other aspects were similar .

I don't say KG was better player in 2008 . But he was definitely more concantrated player due to playing for the contender team . And he performed better .

[Quotatious]

Individually , he was better in 08 . On 100 poss , He had %4.5 better TS and better defensive numbers for his 2008 than 2007 . He only had two more defensive rebounds for 2007 . Beside of those three , other aspects were similar .

You ignore the fact that he played 667 more minutes in '07 RS than '08 RS. That would translate to more than 18 extra games at 36 minutes per game, it's a huge difference. His stamina was clearly superior in '07. That difference in terms of TS% is due to sharing the ball with much better players in Boston than in Minny, and facing much less defensive pressure. He dropped to 54.2% TS in the playoffs in '08, with his slightly below his '07 RS.

Also, his impact was huge in '07 based on plus/minus stats, just like in '08. Wolves lost all 6 games he missed in '07.