Doctor MJ wrote:n short: Dude was simply that good, and then he was moved to a new different team with egos to placate and with knees that no longer performed with only minor complaint.
I've always wondered what information people have on J's knees? All I've ever found was tendinitis being more of an issue in 74 and there was a specific piece saying how much better they felt before the 77 season because of off-court preparations.
if you start from a completely unbiased standpoint, as if these were two entirely different players, it's hard for me to imagine people would be arguing for LeBron '12 over LeBron '09. '09 is simply more outstanding.
Well, I agree most people would do this. That's why most people default to 2009 LeBron vs 2012. However, I don't think I would do this since I lean toward a bunch of other seasons over 2009 LeBron from other players for similar reasons as to why I like 2012 LeBron over 2009 LeBron. See what I'm sayin?
Anaheim Royale/Gilmore Fan wrote:A bunch of advanced stats junkies retrospectively changing their opinions to validate their stats? Shocking....Duncan was better than KG by a clear margin, it's not even a discussion.
What stats would they be validating?
And clearly, no one is discussing KG vs Duncan.
therealbig3 wrote:@ElGee
How were the 03 Spurs crappy offensively? They were +1.8 offensively in the playoffs. And yeah, they might have gotten "support by committee", but that was not a very good overall offensive supporting cast. Duncan definitely deserves credit for that.
And I think offense is being exclusively looked at as "scoring". Duncan's passing was worlds better than someone like McHale.
And if his defense is GOAT-level since 1980, and his offense isn't super high impact, but still quite good, then why exactly is he being overrated? How high did you have him? How low do you think of his offense now?
Not sure what you are saying about the Spurs "crappy" offense? I'm certainly not looking at Duncan's offense as just "scoring." I disagree with your statement about passing pretty strongly.
It's not that I think of his offense as "low" in a bad sense. My Sacred Peak offensive bigs are:
Shaq +6
Kareem +5
Olajuwon +5
Wilt +4.5
KG +4
Duncan +3.5
Walton +3.5
The point I was making is that people so typically anchor their beliefs to a player's offense. Most specifically, to a player's clutch offense. It's the most impressionable memory they carry of someone. It adds up over the course of key games (eg the 03 postseason) and they store that as an even less nuanced memory and simply come out saying "03 Duncan CARRIED blah blah with his bank shots and 'flawless' offensive game." Obviously, he didn't have a flawless offensive game. Obviously, he's not a high-level Global Impact offensive player despite being a very good post presence.
I don't particularly find methodical post play to be conducive to great offense. (I've said this before in detail, no?) It's nice to have a straight post option but really I want such a player to have a good mid-range jumper, be more dangerous on PnR, and be a great passer. Player's like Shaq, Barkley, Kareem and even McHale extract so much value from their scoring (and they can pass) and it tilts this efficiency equation in their favor strongly. It's the difference between a small lift on a solid team and a huge one.
This is why I mentioned Duncan's offense -- I think Garnett's a better offensive player on most decent teams for the reasons just mentioned. But it's precisely because of Duncan's offense (eg "He's a more 'reliable' low post threat") that people have typically argued for Duncan. But hey, they also talk about his clutch play and that's been shown to be fairly off-base.
03 Duncan did two things perfectly that IMO warp the opinion of him. First, he "carried" a bad offense, which people completely revere. And that doesn't do much for me unless it scales to good teams. Second, he had his big games at the end of his biggest series. The Lakers G6 has to be equally as impressionable as the Finals G6 (if not moreso) because it was the Lakers and the last "4 NBA champs" series, and Duncan finished 16-25 and nailed open elbow jumpers repeatedly because Shaq wouldn't come out on him. When Shaq didn't guard him, he'd do damage down low.
Of course, he also had an 11 pt game in a 13-point win over Pho (5th leading scorer). A 15-pt game in a win (3rd leading scorer). A 12-pt game in a blowout win over LA (5th-leading scorer). In the closeout 12-pt win over Dal, he had only 18 pts and 6 of the 34 in the 4th-quarter blowout (do people not remember this quarter?)
Meanwhile, Garnett's incurring the rep of being a "choker," "not a 1st option" and as such a weaker overall player. In 2003, his lowest volume game v LAL was...the final game of the series. He had 18 pts and 5 ast and his team lost by 16. Garnett's gem in that series has been buried and forgotten...a monster 35-20-7 (15-21)!! G2. The next year, he had four PS games (of 18) under 20 points. Minnesota lost all 4 by 9.5 ppg. Of course, due to Losing Bias Garnett's G3 and G7 performances against Sacramento are lost (clutch shots, 30-15-3-5 in G2, 32-21-2-5 4 steals in G7). Even G4-G5 against LA, playing PG when needed, Garnett finished w 28 pts 9 ast (12-24), but his so-called No. 2, Sprewell was TERRIBLE in that game. Garnett had 30 pts 4 ast in G5 (54% TS).
People remember it differently. And we know why they do. So I guess what I meant by his offense being overrated is that people's perceptions are anchored in the offense, and that's been warped. It's been magnified over time as people have denigrated the team around Duncan. I have him in this next group of bigs more bc of defense than offense.
)
