Why is KG's ineffectiveness in the playoffs ignored?

[therealbig3]

First of all, I just want to say that I love KG, I think he's an awesome player, and is easily top 20 all time.

And up until recently, I thought for sure that he was better than Dirk, Malone, Barkley, and although I had him behind D-Rob, I thought him vs D-Rob was a good debate.

But I'm looking at D-Rob's and KG's numbers, both in the regular season and the playoffs, and D-Rob beats him almost across the board, in less minutes. And the main thing that bothers me about KG's production in the playoffs is his terrible scoring efficiency. He has a career .519 TS% in the playoffs. D-Rob, who is notoriously called a choker, is at .547 TS%, which is still respectable, although a far cry from his regular season average of .583.

And for the most part, I've always brushed off KG's inefficiency as a result of terrible teammates, and it is true, he's played with almost no help for most of his career. But then I thought more about it, and D-Rob had bad teammates, Duncan's had bad teammates, and Hakeem's had bad teammates...but they've all still managed to maintain respectable efficiency in the playoffs, while KG's drops from above average to terrible.

But you still see people have KG ranked close to D-Rob, some people might even have him higher, and KG vs Duncan is still a very polarizing debate. I can't help but think either his playoff numbers are being ignored, or that there's an excellent reason that's simply more than "he had bad teammates" that I'm not thinking of.

I guess what I'm asking is, why is KG given a free pass when it comes to his playoff struggles?

[Dr Pepper]

When it comes to comparing greats to greats KG doesn't get a free pass and D-Rob is a significantly better player. But KG winning a championship really boosted how people have reevaluated his career. Imo KG did not have the offense and overall defensive impact (shotblocking specifically) to rival Hakeem or Duncan.

That doesn't mean KG isn't a great HOF player though. But he did not have that 4th quarter, go-to guy capability like other greats or the shotblocking you'd expect an excellent 7 foot defender to have. He had the physical tools and skills to do so though.

[therealbig3]

When it comes to comparing great to greats KG doesn't get a free pass and D-Rob is a significantly better player. But KG winning a championship really boosted how people have reevaluated his career. Imo KG did not have the offense and overall defensive impact (shotblocking specifically) to rival Duncan and Hakeem as franchise players.

That doesn't mean KG isn't a great HOF player player though. But he did not have that 4th quarter, go-to guy capability like other greats.

Defense is different though, and maybe shot blocking is overrated in terms of defensive impact. Doctor MJ has posted +/- studies that show KG destroying the competition in terms of defensive impact, including Duncan. I wouldn't go so far as to say that he was significantly better than Duncan; in fact, I would say Duncan was a slightly better defender, but it's a minute difference, and I think KG is in that Duncan/Hakeem/D-Rob class as a defender.

It's really the offensive side of the ball that I find him lacking...and I think scoring has become underrated on this board by people. It probably is the most important part of the game, when you speak about individual players. Team defense is probably the most important overall aspect of basketball.

[Dr Pepper]

When it comes to comparing great to greats KG doesn't get a free pass and D-Rob is a significantly better player. But KG winning a championship really boosted how people have reevaluated his career. Imo KG did not have the offense and overall defensive impact (shotblocking specifically) to rival Duncan and Hakeem as franchise players.

That doesn't mean KG isn't a great HOF player player though. But he did not have that 4th quarter, go-to guy capability like other greats.

Defense is different though, and maybe shot blocking is overrated in terms of defensive impact. Doctor MJ has posted +/- studies that show KG destroying the competition in terms of defensive impact, including Duncan. I wouldn't go so far as to say that he was significantly better than Duncan; in fact, I would say Duncan was a slightly better defender, but it's a minute difference, and I think KG is in that Duncan/Hakeem/D-Rob class as a defender.

It's really the offensive side of the ball that I find him lacking...and I think scoring has become underrated on this board by people. It probably is the most important part of the game, when you speak about individual players. Team defense is probably the most important overall aspect of basketball.

Imo having that shotblocking presence is huge in the playoffs from an elite 7 foot defender but I agree that KG's real weakness would be his offense compared to those greats. KG didn't have that combination of having both a great offense and defense like Hakeem or Duncan.

[SDChargers#1]

I feel KG gets a tad overrated on these boards. I have him as a top 20 player ever (somewhere around 16-19). But the people who have him over guys like Malone, Barkley, and D-Rob really undervalue offense.

KGs offense doesn't touch these guys. Not only did he score WAY less, but on MUCH worse efficiency. Defense is absolutely important, but the single most important part of the game is scoring points, and people tend to forget that when looking at KGs career.

[therealbig3]

I feel KG gets a tad overrated on these boards. I have him as a top 20 player ever (somewhere around 16-19). But the people who have him over guys like Malone, Barkley, and D-Rob really undervalue offense.

KGs offense doesn't touch these guys. Not only did he score WAY less, but on MUCH worse efficiency. Defense is absolutely important, but the single most important part of the game is scoring points, and people tend to forget that when looking at KGs career.

IDK about that, maybe when looking at an individual player, but in terms of a team, I think team defense is the most important part of basketball. A team with a mediocre offense but great defense can contend...a team with a mediocre defense but a great offense will have a hard time trying to contend imo. And when a great defensive team meets a great offensive team in the playoffs, it always seems like the great defensive team wins.

[Basileus777]

KG's offense as a whole is vastly overrated on these boards.

[An Unbiased Fan]

KG's career TS% is horrible for a star player in the playoffs(in this era). (51.9%).

[Dr Pepper]

Imo some reasons why KG does get overrated, taking a relatively negative approach:

1) Great and popular player; greats can get overrated
2) Stuck with the lacking T Pups, although the OP mentioned that he's far from the only great to endure bad teams
3) Attitude and body language, always looked like a killer on the court even if his offensive stats suggest otherwise or when he infamously trolls smaller players
4) Revitalizing the Celtics, the league was theirs and the Lakers for the past few years even with key injuries, makes ya revisit what could have been if he had a Big 3 for his career

[richboy]

When it comes to comparing great to greats KG doesn't get a free pass and D-Rob is a significantly better player. But KG winning a championship really boosted how people have reevaluated his career. Imo KG did not have the offense and overall defensive impact (shotblocking specifically) to rival Duncan and Hakeem as franchise players.

That doesn't mean KG isn't a great HOF player player though. But he did not have that 4th quarter, go-to guy capability like other greats.

Defense is different though, and maybe shot blocking is overrated in terms of defensive impact. Doctor MJ has posted +/- studies that show KG destroying the competition in terms of defensive impact, including Duncan. I wouldn't go so far as to say that he was significantly better than Duncan; in fact, I would say Duncan was a slightly better defender, but it's a minute difference, and I think KG is in that Duncan/Hakeem/D-Rob class as a defender.

It's really the offensive side of the ball that I find him lacking...and I think scoring has become underrated on this board by people. It probably is the most important part of the game, when you speak about individual players. Team defense is probably the most important overall aspect of basketball.

Doctor MJ showcased KG impact on his team. Like I've said before. +- stats are fine but they have little use in player to player comparison. Situations are completely different. Put it this way. If I'm a great defensive rebounder. If I'm the only rebounder on the team. When I leave the game the offensive rebounding numbers of the opponents will sky rocket. Plus minus is going to say I'm Bill Russell. I'm I suddenly better than another player on another team that has quality rebounders backing up players. KG has great +-. The question is to ask why those numbers are like that.

I've said a million times. KG gets overrated on these boards because his offense is overrated. He was a solid offensive player but was not dominate. To me great defenders can get overrated because some people think defense is equal to offense. If they legit anchors I might agree with that. You can put together an elite defense with coaching and work and just above average defenders. To have a great offense you need great offensive players.

[SDChargers#1]

I feel KG gets a tad overrated on these boards. I have him as a top 20 player ever (somewhere around 16-19). But the people who have him over guys like Malone, Barkley, and D-Rob really undervalue offense.

KGs offense doesn't touch these guys. Not only did he score WAY less, but on MUCH worse efficiency. Defense is absolutely important, but the single most important part of the game is scoring points, and people tend to forget that when looking at KGs career.

IDK about that, maybe when looking at an individual player, but in terms of a team, I think team defense is the most important part of basketball. A team with a mediocre offense but great defense can contend...a team with a mediocre defense but a great offense will have a hard time trying to contend imo. And when a great defensive team meets a great offensive team in the playoffs, it always seems like the great defensive team wins.

I only partially agree. The most important part about basketball is scoring more points than the opposing team. If you score more than the opposition than you win, it is very simple. Obviously defense really helps in that regard because you don't have to score as much to win. But from an individual standpoint (as even you admitted), especially when comparing the GOATs, offense is very important because they seem to put up their points regardless if they are playing a average or good defense. Obviously this is not always the case (Kobe struggling against the Pistons in '04, or Durant against Artest last year). But for the most part great offensive players overcome great defensive players.

There is a reason that teams pay top dollar for a great offensive player who plays 0 defense, but won't pay more than MLE exception money for a great defensive player who plays 0 offense.

[Doctor MJ]

I guess what I'm asking is, why is KG given a free pass when it comes to his playoff struggles?

This is a good question, but let's separate some issues.

You're concerned about KG's playoffs, but you bring Robinson's raw numbers. KG's numbers are never as good as Robinson, regular or post season, and his don't fall off as much in the playoffs as Robinson does. Then of course there's the matter where Robinson's teams tended to get upset whereas KG's teams really never have (losing to the Shaq-Kobe Lakers is not an upset).

So it's quite understandable both why 1) some prefer Robinson to Garnett, and 2) Robinson is much more the poster boy for underperforming in the playoffs.

However, it is reasonable to talk about Garnett in the playoffs, and the fact that his scoring numbers did get worse.

As far as why it's not something I've tended to talk about when I argue for Garnett, well realistically if I'm arguing for something, it confuses matters to delve into details that don't support my point.

As far as whether I factor in the playoffs into my opinion on Garnett, I do. Although I'll admit to not really having the best handle on saying exactly how damning it is.

[NO-KG-AI]

KG isn't a dominant scorer by any stretch, his value was always his passing, rebounding, defense, intangibles, ETC.

BUT, that said, he didn't tumble nearly as much as Robinson. For his peak seasons, and even his title winning year, his raw PPG was higher, and his FG% was usually in the same ball park, vs his regular season numbers.

The only years where KG's efficiency took dramatic drops was 01-02 where he shot 43%, but his PPG was up to 24 points, about 3 points over his average.

1999-2000 was probably his worst scoring outage though, 18.8 points on 38.5% shooting, but that was about as much double and triple teaming as I've ever seen a team do. that Portland team had excellent big man defenders as is, and they threw them all at KG at all times. He had two triple doubles in that series, and another game with 9 assists(8.8 assist average).


Robinson on the other hand takes a bigger dip in efficiency than Garnett does, and he also drops across the board in points, rebounds, assists, etc.

KG might have shot lower FG%, but he almost always upped his rebounding and scoring totals. His playoff PPG is actually higher, despite Robinson, for the most part, being a significantly higher volume scorer in the regular seasons.

Also, KG gets blasted for his playoff record and such.

[GilmoreFan]

KG should get due criticism for it, which is why he's not in the same Tier as Duncan or Shaq, but fighting to beat out Karl Malone and the like.

[therealbig3]

Even with the drop off though, Robinson still put up better numbers. Wilt's and Karl Malone's numbers drop off more than most superstars I've seen, but how many people do you take over them all time?

KG's TS% in the playoffs is just bad, no way around that. And I've always chalked it up to having a bad team around him that didn't take any pressure away. But other great big men, who KG is always mentioned with and is always compared to, have also had bad teams, yet their scoring efficiency didn't significantly decline like KG's did.

What I'm getting at is how valuable is KG's defense, rebounding, and passing, that it can overcome, quite frankly, a massive difference in scoring ability? And compared to the 3 great PFs other than Duncan (Dirk, Malone, Barkley), I would say KG only has a slight advantage as a rebounder and passer, and only considerably beats them in terms of defense. I've actually had KG above guys like K. Malone, Barkley, and Dirk (the comparisons have been piling up recently) before I've decided to re-evaluate exactly where KG stands. Let me use Barkley as an example.

Barkley in the playoffs is a 23/13/4 player with a .584 TS%. KG in the playoffs is a 20/11/4 player with a .519 TS%. Barkley scored with more volume and on WAY better efficiency. He rebounded better and accumulated a similar volume of assists. Before KG showed up in Boston, Barkley destroyed him in terms of leading a team to anything of note in the playoffs. Yet KG is ranked higher by a lot of people, including myself, why? Because of better defense and that one ring? I don't know if I believe that argument anymore.

And why did they end up with a low seed every year until 04? Duncan with the Spurs didn't have great help some years, still took them to 55-60 wins and a top 2-3 seed almost every year. LeBron, who many people will say is not as good as KG, took a terrible Cavs team to back to back 60 win seasons. Malone, Barkley, Hakeem, Robinson, Dirk...all of them took bad teams to lengths above and beyond what they should have been able to do...KG never did that with the Wolves. Yet he's always compared to them, is always ranked above many of them...but what qualifies that kind of ranking? It seems to me there are always excuses used to bring down those great players, like they lost to teams they shouldn't have, while KG never did, but nobody explains why KG couldn't carry his team to 60 wins, so he faced an easier 1st round opponent, like those guys did. In a way, putting yourself in a position to be upset and sometimes losing is better than never putting yourself in a position to be upset, and always losing.

[GilmoreFan]

And why did they end up with a low seed every year until 04? Duncan with the Spurs didn't have great help some years, still took them to 55-60 wins and a top 2-3 seed almost every year. LeBron, who many people will say is not as good as KG, took a terrible Cavs team to back to back 60 win seasons. Malone, Barkley, Hakeem, Robinson, Dirk...all of them took bad teams to lengths above and beyond what they should have been able to do...KG never did that with the Wolves. Yet he's always compared to them, is always ranked above many of them...but what qualifies that kind of ranking? It seems to me there are always excuses used to bring down those great players, like they lost to teams they shouldn't have, while KG never did, but nobody explains why KG couldn't carry his team to 60 wins, so he faced an easier 1st round opponent, like those guys did. In a way, putting yourself in a position to be upset and sometimes losing is better than never putting yourself in a position to be upset, and always losing.

This is something I have a big problem with. It's just blatant homerism alot of the time. KG should be called out on his miserable record some years (relative to Duncan, Lebron, etc), but you listen to Drza, and he has an excuse for every single year the Wolves failed, often ridiculous ones. Almost every guy KG played with is ripped down... Brandon was a "solid PG", Billups "a nobody", Googs and Marbury are conveniently ignored, Wally sucked (never mind he made an all-star team in 02 and had incredible efficiency), Cassell and Spree "don't count" after 04, Joe Smith wasn't a decent player in his prime, and on and on. It's getting to be as bad as Kobe fans I read.

[drza]

...

You've put so many different debate topics into this brief thread so far that really all could be topics on their own.

1) The title, while a bit leading, could be its own thread: has KG been "ineffective" in the postseason? The first round exits are often cited, and you mention his TS%...so, then, we could talk about whether or not that really adds up to "ineffective" in the postseason, even compared to other greats.

2) The OP seems to focus a lot on KG in the postseason vs Robinson in the postseason. Another worthy debate topic, that a few folks now have taken a stab at.

3) KG vs Barkley, Malone, or Dirk. More of the them of your most recent post, all three of these could be (and often are) threads of their own. Similar threads on Dirk and Malone have been swirling around the main page for the last several days.

4) Why were the Wolves' regular season records what they were. Yet another topic, one that's often covered in depth, that has in fact been covered in depth in the last few days in other threads.

All of these are interesting, but I don't know of a coherent way to discuss all of them at one time in any kind of depth. My answers to each of the 4 would be that 1) KG was extremely effective in the postseason, with a huge individual impact, 2) as others have pointed out, KG's value is tied less into his shooting/scoring efficiency than was Robinson, and thus his decrease there didn't hurt his ability to have a dominating impact while Robinson without his high efficiency/high volume scoring was not able to contribute as much, 3) KG was the best of the three for different reasons that ultimately add up to having a larger impact, and 4) KG's supporting casts on the Wolves were not similarly bad to anyone of his generation. Dirk and Duncan never had it as bad, and when LeBron's casts were similar he posted similar results.

I could (and often do) respond to any of the 4 in more depth, but with them all on the table at once not really sure which, if any, is worth it to tackle here.

[NO-KG-AI]

Id's say attack number 1

[GilmoreFan]

and 4) KG's supporting casts on the Wolves were not similarly bad to anyone of his generation. Dirk and Duncan never had it as bad, and when LeBron's casts were similar he posted similar results.

This is a total fantasy, worthy of considerable scorn. Truly, you are pathologically incapable of admitting to any meaningful failure of KG's. He had crap teams in 03 and 07, but not for all those years, that's totally false. Duncan's 02 and 03 teams compare very favourably to some of KG's teams, the same could be said of some of Lebron's.

[therealbig3]

...

You've put so many different debate topics into this brief thread so far that really all could be topics on their own.

1) The title, while a bit leading, could be its own thread: has KG been "ineffective" in the postseason? The first round exits are often cited, and you mention his TS%...so, then, we could talk about whether or not that really adds up to "ineffective" in the postseason, even compared to other greats.

2) The OP seems to focus a lot on KG in the postseason vs Robinson in the postseason. Another worthy debate topic, that a few folks now have taken a stab at.

3) KG vs Barkley, Malone, or Dirk. More of the them of your most recent post, all three of these could be (and often are) threads of their own. Similar threads on Dirk and Malone have been swirling around the main page for the last several days.

4) Why were the Wolves' regular season records what they were. Yet another topic, one that's often covered in depth, that has in fact been covered in depth in the last few days in other threads.

All of these are interesting, but I don't know of a coherent way to discuss all of them at one time in any kind of depth. My answers to each of the 4 would be that 1) KG was extremely effective in the postseason, with a huge individual impact, 2) as others have pointed out, KG's value is tied less into his shooting/scoring efficiency than was Robinson, and thus his decrease there didn't hurt his ability to have a dominating impact while Robinson without his high efficiency/high volume scoring was not able to contribute as much, 3) KG was the best of the three for different reasons that ultimately add up to having a larger impact, and 4) KG's supporting casts on the Wolves were not similarly bad to anyone of his generation. Dirk and Duncan never had it as bad, and when LeBron's casts were similar he posted similar results.

I could (and often do) respond to any of the 4 in more depth, but with them all on the table at once not really sure which, if any, is worth it to tackle here.

Lol, well I first just wanted to discuss KG's individual playoff numbers, namely his TS%, but then thought of more and more discussion topics that I've been thinking about and just added them on.

As for point #1, I agree, KG has a huge individual impact, he's a great player after all, top 20 all time imo, so he's going to have a huge impact. So no need to argue that point.

But #2, Robinson was at least as good defensively as KG, and he was a great rebounder in his own right. I'm sure you can delve into much more advanced ways of discussing this than simply raw averages, which I'm not very knowledgeable of. But it seems to me that Robinson is one of those players whose impact was especially beyond just scoring.

#4, LeBron had a Finals appearance and back to back 60 win seasons with a comparably bad supporting cast. I don't understand why you say he had similar results.

So if you could elaborate on points 2 and 4, that would be greatly appreciated .

EDIT: Actually, point 3 is what I'm most interested in, how does KG have a larger impact than guys who were/are considerably greater scorers than him, so if you want to respond to a point, point #3 is most interesting to me. If you've already responded to it in another thread just point me to it, and I'll go read what you wrote.