G35 wrote:LA Bird wrote:Not sure why leadership is such a big focus in this thread. Robinson and Garnett have diametrically different leadership styles but one is not better than the other just because they are more or less vocal. If Robinson had a better supporting cast and won more rings in the mid 90s, we would be singing praises about his quiet leadership and humility like we do with Duncan, instead of calling him soft and passive. If Garnett had a better supporting cast and won more rings in the mid 00s, his passion and intensity would be credited with motivating the best out of his teammates and he won't be criticized for being overly-competitive. The narrative of what makes a good leader can easily be shaped by team success and personally, I don't find the leadership difference between the two to be very noteworthy.
In terms of on-court play, I consider Robinson to be the better player but his overall career to be less valuable due to longevity since he came into the league too old.
If you do not understand the value of leadership by now then nothing anyone is going to say will change your mind.
But there is a reason why KG went out in the first round seven straight years.
There is a reason why they missed the playoffs three straight years.
There is a reason why players like Chauncey left the Wolves.
It's the same reason why Durant did not want to play with WB anymore. Its why Kyrie didn't want to play with Lebron anymore. There is a reason why players want to go to the Warriors.
The reason why you say if is because in reality there are not any excuses for why KG did not do more for Minnesota.
KG and DRob both had similar supporting casts (except in 2004 where KG had a superior cast) prior to Duncan being drafted.
But Robinson's teams had better RS and PS success. DRob anchored one of the biggest single season win turnarounds in league history. Robinson led the team to multiple 50+ win seasons and a 60+ win season:
Spurs win totals from 1990-1996
90 - 56 wins
91 - 55 wins
92 - 47 wins
93 - 49 wins
94 - 55 wins
95 - 62 wins
96 - 59 wins
Average wins 54.7 per season over seven seasons...during this time they went to the semi-finals four times and the WCF's once
TWolves win totals from 1996-2007
96 - 26 wins
97 - 40 wins
98 - 45 wins
99 - 25 wins (strike season)
00 - 50 wins
01 - 47 wins
02 - 50 wins
03 - 51 wins
04 - 58 wins
05 - 44 wins
06 - 33 wins
07 - 32 wins
Not counting the strike season the Wolves avg'd 43.3 wins over 11 seasons...during which time they went to the WCF's once and lost in the first round seven times.
What also should be noted during this time is that Flip Saunders was the Wolves head coach for KG's for 9 1/2 seasons. Whatever you may think about Flip he was a better than average coach compiling a .525 winning record over 1246 games.
David Robinson on the other hand, had to deal with six different coaches in seven years.
Larry Brown
Bob Bass
Rex Hughes
Jerry Tarkanian
John Lucas
Bob Hill
Some of these guys were all time bad coaches, like Jerry Tarkanian, who only coached 20 games in the NBA and quit with a record of 9-11.
Jerry Lucas' only winning seasons came while coaching Robinson...with the Spurs he was 94-49....everywhere else he coached he 79-209, coaching at Philadelphia and Cleveland. Yeah both teams got rid of Lucas before acquiring Iverson and Lebron.
Bob Hill another coach who only had winning seasons coaching Robinson; Hill was 121-43 with Robinson when he was healthy and was 189-250 without Robinson. The Spurs got rid of Bob Hill and hired Popovich right before drafting Duncan.
So when people talk about Minnesota did not put anything around KG, the Spurs did not do much better. It was just the David was just that good in the RS that he could power those Spurs to good RS records. But in the PS, yeah he did not look as good because he was getting his teams to overachieve.
If you wanted to make a current comparison, this would be Anthony Davis in New Orleans...except David Robinson was taking his teams to the PS and the second round.
But the thing is that leadership is just one aspect of this comparison, a big one imo but still just one aspect. But you notice none of the KG supporters are pulling out any stats....none whatsoever....because DRob kills him in everything. Individually its no contest, advanced, boxscore, whatever, DRob kills KG.
Then some people want to talk about KG's defense....before going to Boston, no KG-led team ever came close to being the #1 ranked defensive team or even top five.
Robinson is a GOAT level defensive anchor:
DRTG Spurs 1990-96
90 - 3rd
91 - 1st
92 - 1st
93 - 10th
94 - 9th
95 - 5th
96 - 3rd
So in those seven years, the Spurs ranked no worse than 10th defensively and twice were the best defense in the league.
OTOH, KG with all of his ability to switch and read offenses was never able to get the Wolves into the top 5 defensively:
96- 20th
97 - 15th
98 - 23rd
99 - 11th
00 - 12th
01 - 16th
02 - 15th
03 - 16th
04 - 6th
05 - 15th
06 - 10th
07 - 21st
A lot of what KG rides on is that the TWolves never put any talent around him, injuries, quality of competition, Minnesota not being a FA destination. But the same thing was true of Robinson in San Antonio, they have never been a FA destination, nor has management spent a lot of money in building a team. This is true even when Duncan was there, the Spurs have always try to stay within budget.
There is no argument for KG being better than DRob on any metric, so its so confusing that people who tout analytics, facts, objectivity, progressiveness, are still trying to build a narrative in KG's favor. The only thing you can point to is KG's longevity but then you have to balance that out with the fact it took KG three to four years to really become a difference maker and his last few years on Boston, Brooklyn, and Minnesota was just him collecting a check.
DRob was an integral part of two championships at latter half of his career, those years do count in his favor as instead of people acting like he was some five minute bench player. He was still guarding Shaq.....