RealGM

both in their primes

Is ridiculousness allowed here?

I was expecting a comment like that. I understand bird has a better name value but despite his talent, he didn't anchor the defensive system like garnett in 2008. nonetheless, I just want to see people's opinions.

Mattsanity wrote:I was expecting a comment like that. I understand bird has a better name value but despite his talent, he didn't anchor the defensive system like garnett in 2008. nonetheless, I just want to see people's opinions.

Bird won three consecutive MVPs and was discussed as the GOAT. I love Garnett's D, but he never approached that kind of run.

Bird has a GOAT peak.

NO-KG-AI wrote:Bird has a GOAT peak.

I wouldn't say that. MJ, LeBron, Shaq, Kareem, Wilt, and maybe Magic have better Peaks IMO.

I have to lol the 2 votes on Garnett.
Bird>>Garnett.

I thought this was interesting, so I'll throw it out here. Food for thought.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=9486

As I consider KG better than Dirk, maybe this isn't so totally outlandish.

Bird of course.


Garnett didnt nearly have the offensive impact Bird had.

I've come to view Garnett as fitting within a similar archetype as Bird.

Offensively, they could play on-ball but were really best off-ball. Neither drew a ton of fouls. I suspect their shot profiles are fairly similar (I know KG's since the data is there), with a heavy diet of midrange. Both were really intuitive connective passers. Bird was a better shooter and passer, but those were also Garnett's specialties. Bird was more of a runner off-ball in the vein of Miller/Curry, whereas Garnett loved to set screens and then pop open. Garnett was more athletic (and taller) of course, so that helped on both ends.

Defensively, both had that roaming quality, and I suspect they saw the court in a similar way, but Garnett was able to take advantage physically in a way that Bird could not (mobility for the perimeter and verticality for the rim). Both had excellent motors and were very intense.

Both of them feel like the ultimate "great st everythingh but reliable volume scoring" players with bird being the offense slanted version of what garnett provides all around

I think garnett fits more seamlessly in more contexts and adds even more value without scoring so i woukd take him a bit higher

I'll take Bird, but it's close. KGs longevity probably has me ranking him higher all-time.

Ol Roy wrote:I've come to view Garnett as fitting within a similar archetype as Bird.

Um. No.

Bird is actual tough. KG is fake tough.

A Bird lead team will always be tougher.

I like Bird better, my eye test say Bird is better, but advanced stats and an appreciation for defense says Garnett is the better player

It would depend to some degree on the era. In earlier eras, Bird's defense can be put at PF where there are a lot less stars, but before 1980, he loses the 3 point shooting advantage so I'd go with Garnett.

In the 80s, he shot very few 3's but it's the probably the era where the PFs of his day present the least challenge to his defense, though good SFs could hurt him. On a team where he would play PF (most of them), it's pretty much a wash or favors Bird.

In more modern eras, Bird is dragged out onto the floor on defense where he was not that good. On the other hand, in the modern era, he'd get a lot more 3PA and be even more valuable offensively. So, in the 90s and 00s, I'd lean Garnett as they wouldn't take full advantage of Bird's 3 point shooting.

After 2015, it swings back to advantage BIrd as 3 point spamming grows more and more prevalent which compensates for Bird's defense.

penbeast0 wrote:I like Bird better, my eye test say Bird is better, but advanced stats and an appreciation for defense says Garnett is the better player

It would depend to some degree on the era. In earlier eras, Bird's defense can be put at PF where there are a lot less stars, but before 1980, he loses the 3 point shooting advantage so I'd go with Garnett.

In the 80s, he shot very few 3's but it's the probably the era where the PFs of his day present the least challenge to his defense, though good SFs could hurt him. On a team where he would play PF (most of them), it's pretty much a wash or favors Bird.

In more modern eras, Bird is dragged out onto the floor on defense where he was not that good. On the other hand, in the modern era, he'd get a lot more 3PA and be even more valuable offensively. So, in the 90s and 00s, I'd lean Garnett as they wouldn't take full advantage of Bird's 3 point shooting.

After 2015, it swings back to advantage BIrd as 3 point spamming grows more and more prevalent which compensates for Bird's defense.

Bird is best playing free safety on defense. Today’s defenses would allow him to do more of that.

one year peak i'd lean bird but understand taking KG

multi year peaks the gap increases in bird's favor

prime's id take bird

overall career's its a tossup tho but id prolly lean kg for the longevity advantage

Bird is one of the best ever offensively and Garnett isn't close. Bird is underrated defensively. Floor raiser is probably Garnett but ceiling raiser is Bird.

penbeast0 wrote:I like Bird better, my eye test say Bird is better, but advanced stats and an appreciation for defense says Garnett is the better player

It would depend to some degree on the era. In earlier eras, Bird's defense can be put at PF where there are a lot less stars, but before 1980, he loses the 3 point shooting advantage so I'd go with Garnett.

In the 80s, he shot very few 3's but it's the probably the era where the PFs of his day present the least challenge to his defense, though good SFs could hurt him. On a team where he would play PF (most of them), it's pretty much a wash or favors Bird.

In more modern eras, Bird is dragged out onto the floor on defense where he was not that good. On the other hand, in the modern era, he'd get a lot more 3PA and be even more valuable offensively. So, in the 90s and 00s, I'd lean Garnett as they wouldn't take full advantage of Bird's 3 point shooting.

After 2015, it swings back to advantage BIrd as 3 point spamming grows more and more prevalent which compensates for Bird's defense.

I like this overview of Bird's era-relative value.

I wonder if, in this era, KG wouldn't be taking 3s himself, though. He was about a 79% FT shooter on his career, and shot over 45% from 16-23 feet on over 30% (!!!) of his total shot volume. And they weren't all 17-footer, he was routinely bombing from north of 20 feet. Like, he was booked for 45% from 10-23 feet, which is nearly Dirk-like, and on fairly nutters volume. So I think the potential was certainly there. He only had two seasons of 1+ 3PA/g, and he shot 31.9% and 37% during those years, FWIW.

Obviously, Garnett was a much better defender. Bird was a pretty good post defender, fought hard through screens and on the boards, and he had great anticipation for passing lanes and the like, but he just wasn't in the same class as Garnett defensively.

Bird had his ups and downs in the playoffs, and obviously against certain matchups, but that is also true of most guys. I think that some of his mystique erodes a little as we look at the reality of his performances against some of his peers while peeking a little behind his raw accolades. The 3-straight-MVP situation is very hard to overcome narratively for most people, so someone like KG who won only one MVP has a hard time overcoming that weight with many. You could counter that he had a larger upper-bound of competitors. Bird had Kareem very early, Moses and Dr. J. Magic throughout, and then Jordan at the end... but KG had Dirk, Shaq, Duncan, Lebron and Kobe through his relevant seasons.

Fun to think about; both great players.

migya wrote:Bird is one of the best ever offensively and Garnett isn't close. Bird is underrated defensively. Floor raiser is probably Garnett but ceiling raiser is Bird.

Rookie Bird suggests his floor raise is probably bigger too.