Hal14 wrote: Timmyyy wrote:
Hal14 wrote:We all know Kobe should have won it in 2009 - not LeBron.
Wait, what? We all know that? That is common knowledge? I must have missed that.
Hal14 wrote:2) KG was not the clear cut #1 guy on the 2008 Celtics championship team. He was arguably the #1 guy but Paul Pierce carried that team to the title just as much as KG did. Pierce was the NBA finals MVP...not KG. Pierce led the team in points per game, minutes per game, he was better than KG in FG%, 3 point % and FT %.
Yeah, you compare offense only. The fact that KG was the co anchor on offense how you just analyzed (where the Celtics weren't even all that good), while being the clear cut most important player on defense, anchoring a historically great defense, IS making him the clear cut best player on the team.
How I just analyzed, what? You're trying to twist my words around. I didn't say KG was the co-anchor on offense. I said Garnett was arguably the #1 guy...meaning the overall #1 guy on the team, not on offense. Yes, KG was their best defender but Pierce was also a strong defender. And the fact that Pierce outscored KG by 3 points per game and also out-performed him in all of those other categories I mentioned previously (not all of the categories were offense, what about minutes per game?)
Co-anchor on offense? Pierce was the go-to scorer on that team, Allen was their 2nd leading scorer in the finals, KG was also an important part of the offense and none of them would have been as effective without Rondo's playmaking. To say that KG was the clear cut #1 player on that team is a stretch IMO. Even KG would tell you that was Pierce's team.
Why do only the finals matter?
For a team to be "carried to a title", they need to win 4 rounds, not just one, and KG (+10.3 on, +19.8 on/off) was quite clearly the best Celtic on their way to the title. Pierce was +7.9 and +8.6 in these metrics. If KG played at the same level as Pierce, they quite arguably don't beat the Hawks, nor do they beat the Cavs (both series were won in 7 games).
If you aren't a fan of impact metrics, then note that KG was also handily ahead in most box score metrics, such as PER (23.0 to 17.4), WS/48 (0.199 to 0.145) and BPM (6.4 to 3.9). It's competitive when we look at PPG and TS% (20.4 and 54.2 for KG, 19.7 and 57 for PP); in fact, one could give the edge to Pierce here if they value efficiency highly. It is, however, worth noting that KG was ahead in ORTG (112 to 110) which is an overall offensive box score efficiency measure (i.e. it also includes turnovers, assists and offensive boards). So, across the entirety of the playoffs, their offensive contributions, as measured by the box score, at the very least seem in the same ballpark.
Claiming that Pierce outperformed KG in MPG as a non-offensive category when he played 38.1 minutes to 38.0 is... interesting analysis, to say the least.
But KG is known for having impact that's not in the box score... so how did these 3 compare in the playoffs in terms of Net ratings? I'll use a 5 year sample from 2008-2012.
On their own, Paul Pierce was -9.85 (282 minutes), Allen was -5.74 (248 minutes), KG was +38.1 (30 minutes only).
The combination of these guys (i.e. 2 on, one off) -
Pierce/Allen was -16.89 (303 minutes)
KG/Pierce was +6.91 (402 minutes)
KG/Allen was +12.20 (369 minutes)
All 3 together was +6.43 (1937 minutes).
I generally think these sample sizes are small, but the NBA finals was a grand total of 288 minutes, and considering your previous metric was looking at PPG and efficiency in only 288 minutes of data, I feel like sample sizes aren't of great use to you.
But I digress - note how even with Pierce and Allen, the Celtics were just not that great in the playoffs, but they consistently fared well with Garnett? And it's been a consistent theme with Garnett his entire career - teams have constantly played better with him when he is on the court.
Also, I do think that Pierce is a good defender, and in general, I feel like Pierce is quite underrated historically, but KG Is an all time great defender, who had a lethal combination of size, athleticism and awareness that few players ever had. Most larger scale RAPM samples (including the 2012-2016 sample, where KG led the league FROM AGES 35 TO 39) place KG as the best defender in the league since his move to Boston, and as a top 5 defender prior to that. Of course, I do suspect that KG could have been ranked #1 with the Wolves had he not been tasked with quarterbacking the offence for those teams too (where, from 2002-2006, he was actually ranked 3rd in ORAPM too!)
But of course, Pierce was a better scorer in a 6 game finals series, so he's the arguable best player and the #1 option, right?
Was Tony Parker a better player than Tim Duncan because he was a better scorer than him in a finals series in 2007?