RealGM

Garnett is seen ahead of Moses for their careers on here but Moses actually had a better career. Metrics support his case, Garnett only ahead on vorp and slightly on bpm. Looking at the playoffs, Moses is considerably better as Garnett performed less than his RS. When looking at accolades and career achievements Moses is clearly ahead with three MVPs in a time with Kareem, Magic, Bird and Erving.

Moses has a case for top 15 alltime and Garnett really doesn't have much of one.

Make your cases.

Checking Moses’ career, I didn’t know he played until 1995..

He disappeared from relevancy after 1989, his last all star year.. but I didn’t know much about what happened to him after he left the Sixers in 86.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I mean i’m sure there are some situations where you’d be better off with Moses, like if your team is in desperate need of scoring then sure Moses may be a better fit but KG is going to be more valuable in literally every other scenario.

The case for KG isn’t a complicated one. He has arguably the best impact stats in the league over the the 2002-2008 stretch, and doesn’t come up weak in other areas(box score production, leadership, team results).

Moses’ weaknesses have been well documented on here, very weak passing, and inconsistent defense outside of his peak.

Both guys have one title, so that’s not an advantage for Moses. I guess if you put a lot of value into Mvps, then maybe there’s a case to be made.

Moses may have a case as a floor raiser too. He did more with mediocre talent in Houston in his prime than Garnett did with even less talent in Minnesota where it was probably not a good idea to pass much anyway, just go strong to the basket every possession. More fun to watch too for me as his constant effort and brutal bull tactics were more fun than Garnett's barking and attempts to show up his opponents. But for any team with the talent to have real championship aspirations, hard to think of a situation where you would rather have Moses.

Of course these are both among the NBA all-time greats and, like the Sixers, you are lucky to have either one in their prime.

I like Moses and really not a fan of KG, but it's not the case. Moses was amazing, but Garnett was on another level in terms of peaks and careers.

penbeast0 wrote:Moses may have a case as a floor raiser too. He did more with mediocre talent in Houston in his prime than Garnett did with even less talent in Minnesota where it was probably not a good idea to pass much anyway, just go strong to the basket every possession. More fun to watch too for me as his constant effort and brutal bull tactics were more fun than Garnett's barking and attempts to show up his opponents. But for any team with the talent to have real championship aspirations, hard to think of a situation where you would rather have Moses.

Of course these are both among the NBA all-time greats and, like the Sixers, you are lucky to have either one in their prime.

Moses was certainly better in the playoffs and carried an ordinary Houston so far. Beating the Lakers as they did was amazing.

Philly in 83 is the situation that shows how Moses was great for championship aspirations. They performed better than the 08 Celts.

70sFan wrote:I like Moses and really not a fan of KG, but it's not the case. Moses was amazing, but Garnett was on another level in terms of peaks and careers.

What are you basing this on?

ty 4191 wrote:

70sFan wrote:I like Moses and really not a fan of KG, but it's not the case. Moses was amazing, but Garnett was on another level in terms of peaks and careers.

What are you basing this on?

Watching games and looking at impact signals.

70sFan wrote:

ty 4191 wrote:

70sFan wrote:I like Moses and really not a fan of KG, but it's not the case. Moses was amazing, but Garnett was on another level in terms of peaks and careers.

What are you basing this on?

Watching games and looking at impact signals.

Can you cite the impact signals you're using? Specifically. Thank you.

migya wrote:

penbeast0 wrote:Moses may have a case as a floor raiser too. He did more with mediocre talent in Houston in his prime than Garnett did with even less talent in Minnesota where it was probably not a good idea to pass much anyway, just go strong to the basket every possession. More fun to watch too for me as his constant effort and brutal bull tactics were more fun than Garnett's barking and attempts to show up his opponents. But for any team with the talent to have real championship aspirations, hard to think of a situation where you would rather have Moses.

Of course these are both among the NBA all-time greats and, like the Sixers, you are lucky to have either one in their prime.

Moses was certainly better in the playoffs and carried an ordinary Houston so far. Beating the Lakers as they did was amazing.

Philly in 83 is the situation that shows how Moses was great for championship aspirations. They performed better than the 08 Celts.

On the flipside, post 2008 celtics did better than post 83 sixers despite neither being a young team.

ty 4191 wrote:

70sFan wrote:

ty 4191 wrote:
What are you basing this on?

Watching games and looking at impact signals.

Can you cite the impact signals you're using? Specifically. Thank you.

As always, various verisons of +/- numbers and with/without analysis. Moses looks very good by them, but not on Garnett level. Besides, Moses imapct was very inconsistent throughout his career, his post-1985 work was less impressive than old Garnett career.

70sFan wrote:As always, various verisons of +/- numbers and with/without analysis. Moses looks very good by them, but not on Garnett level. Besides, Moses imapct was very inconsistent throughout his career, his post-1985 work was less impressive than old Garnett career.

Can you post any data?

Agree with OP

ty 4191 wrote:

70sFan wrote:As always, various verisons of +/- numbers and with/without analysis. Moses looks very good by them, but not on Garnett level. Besides, Moses imapct was very inconsistent throughout his career, his post-1985 work was less impressive than old Garnett career.

Can you post any data?

Hey ty, 70sFan One quick overview I found for a few major stats can be found in the Backpicks Top 40 articles (Moses: https://thinkingbasketball.net/2018/01/08/backpicks-goat-24-moses-malone/, Garnett: https://thinkingbasketball.net/2018/03/19/backpicks-goat-8-kevin-garnett/). The stats are listed at the top, a more in-depth analysis of them is listed at the bottom in the "impact evaluation". There's film study in the middle.

In short:
Prime WOWY: Garnett 4th All time >> Moses 85th All time
Prime Regularized WOWYr: Garnett 31st All time >> Moses 214th All time (this stat is like going from APM -> RAPM but for WOWY)
Peak BPM: Garnett 10th all time >> Moses 154th all time
Peak ws/48 (not my favorite stat, but it goes back far): Garnett 16th all time > Moses 34th all time
Peak PIPM: Garnett >> Moses (note: PIPM for moses is estimated)
Augmented Plus Minus: Garnett >> Moses (note: incomplete sample for Moses)
CORP: Garnett >> Moses
And in the more advanced stats we only have for Garnett (like full-career on/off / RAPM samples, ESPN's RPM, etc.), Garnett looks like a Top 10 player ever.

Moses is obviously the better rebounder / foul-drawer / rim scorer, but: in the film I've seen, Garnett looks like he's in a different stratosphere as a defender, passer, shooter (particularly relative to position), in BBIQ, etc.

If you care about time-machine arguments for how they'd perform in the current era, Garnett probably also improves more than Moses: big-man rebounding (particularly offensive rebounding) is at an all-time low in value today, while big-man defensive versatility and shooting is at an all-time high in value.

You could make a team-success-based argument for Moses (which presumably focuses on the 1983 76ers title team), but it's pretty near consensus that Garnett had the worst-fitting / worst supporting cast of the usual all-time players.

You could argue for Moses using awards (mainly MVP's / the Finals MVP), but 1) MVP does not always mean best player (e.g. Kareem was definitely better in 79), and 2) KG certainly has his fair share of awards (e.g. 10 more all-defense teams) and you can certainly argue KG was Finals-MVP level in 08.

Personally, Moses is a great player, but I do have KG a level higher for peak / career. I certainly get that others disagree though!

falcolombardi wrote:

migya wrote:

penbeast0 wrote:Moses may have a case as a floor raiser too. He did more with mediocre talent in Houston in his prime than Garnett did with even less talent in Minnesota where it was probably not a good idea to pass much anyway, just go strong to the basket every possession. More fun to watch too for me as his constant effort and brutal bull tactics were more fun than Garnett's barking and attempts to show up his opponents. But for any team with the talent to have real championship aspirations, hard to think of a situation where you would rather have Moses.

Of course these are both among the NBA all-time greats and, like the Sixers, you are lucky to have either one in their prime.

Moses was certainly better in the playoffs and carried an ordinary Houston so far. Beating the Lakers as they did was amazing.

Philly in 83 is the situation that shows how Moses was great for championship aspirations. They performed better than the 08 Celts.

On the flipside, post 2008 celtics did better than post 83 sixers despite neither being a young team.

The Celts were good until 2011 but Philly was quite good as well for a few years. Garnett was certainly a better defender than Moses but the pressure Moses put on the opposition oon offense far exceeded Garnett, and many players alltime.

Let’s look at some stats

Gonna compare them at their best so I’ll look at single and multi year peak

Single year peak first!

1983 Moses Malone

24.1 IA PTS/75
1.3 IA AST/75
15.1 IA TRB/75
1.1 STL/75
1.9 BLK/75
3.2 TOV/75
+4.7 rTS
+4 OBPM
-.3 DBPM
+3.7 BPM
+1.6 BP OBPM
+1.8 BP DBPM
+3.4 BP BPM
+3.31 OPIPM
+1.5 DPIPM
+4.81 PIPM
+3.04 ORAPTOR
+3.12 DRAPTOR
+6.16 RAPTOR

2004 KG

26.7 IA PTS/75
5.5 IA AST/75
15.3 IA TRB/75
1.5 STL/75
2.3 BLK/75
2.6 TOV/75
+3.1 rTS
+6.8 OBPM
+3.3 DBPM
+10.2 BPM
+3.7 BP OBPM
+3.2 BP DBPM
+6.9 BP BPM
+4.72 OPIPM
+3.35 DPIPM
+8.06 PIPM
+5.04 ORAPTOR
+4.63 DRAPTOR
+9.67 RAPTOR

Multi Year Peak!

80-83 Moses

25.9 IA PTS/75
1.6 IA AST/75
14 IA TRB/75
.9 STL/75
1.5 BLK/75
3.3 TOV/75
+4.1 rTS%
+4.8 OBPM
-1.4 DBPM
+3.4 BPM
+2 BP OBPM
+.5 BP DBPM
+2.5 BP BPM
+3.58 OPIPM
-.05 DPIPM
+3.53 PIPM
+3.07 ORAPTOR
+.96 DRAPTOR
+4.02 RAPTOR

01-05 KG
24.4 IA PTS/75
5.9 IA AST/75
14.2 IA TRB/75
1.4 STL/75
1.7 BLK/75
2.8 TOV/75
+3 rTS%
+6.1 OBPM
+2.6 DBPM
+8.7 BPM
+3.7 BP OBPM
+2.3 BP DBPM
+6 BP BPM
+3.82 OPIPM
+2.58 DPIPM
+6.4 PIPM
+4.58 ORAPTOR
+3.5 DRAPTOR
+8.08 RAPTOR

Yes KG drops in the PO but Moses isn’t some huge PO dropper and there’s a very very very large gap in quality of play that PO resilience doesn’t bridge

Not gonna go super in-depth with film analysis but KG was able to do a lot more than Moses and has one of the most all around games ever which makes gives him all time level value at his peak while Moses is the best offensive rebounder ever and an all time post scorer but a terrible passer and a good not great defender at his peak with very inconsistent defense for most of his career. I think he peaks at an MVP level. Both are great but different tiers of greatness

KG has 15-17 HQ Years with little injury trouble until the end of that stretch and is playing at an all star level up until his mid to late 30s compared to Moses who’s probably only giving you 11-13 HQ (15 at most if you think 76-90) years and without much injury trouble and his playing at a HQ level until about 34 years old. I’d say the quality of play gives KG a considerable edge in longevity even if the raw gears seem similar

I don’t care about accolades or team accomplishments but

KG
1x Champ
1x MVP
1x DPOY
9x All NBA (4x 1st 3x 2nd 2x 3rd)
15x All star
12x All D (9x 1st 3x 2nd)

Moses
1x champ
1x FMVP
3x Mvp
8x All NBA (4x 1st 4x 2nd)
13x All Star
2x All D (1x 1st 1x 2nd)

I’d lean towards KG in that department but ig it’s pretty close

But yea statistically and film wise I think it’s pretty clear that KG was a lot better than Moses. Moses has some pretty impressive floor raising feats but so does KG and I think KG’s Passing and all time defense while also being more of a spacer than Moses makes him clear as a ceiling raiser

Btw KG leads Moses in almost every Impact metric whether you’re looking at single year peak multi year peak prime or career. Idet Moses beats KG in a lot of impact metrics in the PO despite very small samples making variance higher so I really don’t see how you’re gonna make the case for Moses > KG

migya wrote:

penbeast0 wrote:Moses may have a case as a floor raiser too. He did more with mediocre talent in Houston in his prime than Garnett did with even less talent in Minnesota where it was probably not a good idea to pass much anyway, just go strong to the basket every possession. More fun to watch too for me as his constant effort and brutal bull tactics were more fun than Garnett's barking and attempts to show up his opponents. But for any team with the talent to have real championship aspirations, hard to think of a situation where you would rather have Moses.

Of course these are both among the NBA all-time greats and, like the Sixers, you are lucky to have either one in their prime.

Moses was certainly better in the playoffs and carried an ordinary Houston so far. Beating the Lakers as they did was amazing.

Philly in 83 is the situation that shows how Moses was great for championship aspirations. They performed better than the 08 Celts.

I don’t see how

KG carried a bad Minnesota to the PO almost every year he was in Minnesota and when he was given an ordinary roster he took the Lakers to 6 in the WCF. 83 76ers being vs the 08 Celtics is certainly a debate but That’s peak Moses vs non Peak KG so it’s not an apples to apples comp

ceoofkobefans wrote:

migya wrote:

penbeast0 wrote:Moses may have a case as a floor raiser too. He did more with mediocre talent in Houston in his prime than Garnett did with even less talent in Minnesota where it was probably not a good idea to pass much anyway, just go strong to the basket every possession. More fun to watch too for me as his constant effort and brutal bull tactics were more fun than Garnett's barking and attempts to show up his opponents. But for any team with the talent to have real championship aspirations, hard to think of a situation where you would rather have Moses.

Of course these are both among the NBA all-time greats and, like the Sixers, you are lucky to have either one in their prime.

Moses was certainly better in the playoffs and carried an ordinary Houston so far. Beating the Lakers as they did was amazing.

Philly in 83 is the situation that shows how Moses was great for championship aspirations. They performed better than the 08 Celts.

I don’t see how

KG carried a bad Minnesota to the PO almost every year he was in Minnesota and when he was given an ordinary roster he took the Lakers to 6 in the WCF. 83 76ers being vs the 08 Celtics is certainly a debate but That’s peak Moses vs non Peak KG so it’s not an apples to apples comp

Garnett did well with what he had on Minnesota but so did Moses in Houston. In 82 beating the prime Lakers was probably his career highlight. Garnett never did anything quite like that.

migya wrote:

ceoofkobefans wrote:

migya wrote:
Moses was certainly better in the playoffs and carried an ordinary Houston so far. Beating the Lakers as they did was amazing.

Philly in 83 is the situation that shows how Moses was great for championship aspirations. They performed better than the 08 Celts.

I don’t see how

KG carried a bad Minnesota to the PO almost every year he was in Minnesota and when he was given an ordinary roster he took the Lakers to 6 in the WCF. 83 76ers being vs the 08 Celtics is certainly a debate but That’s peak Moses vs non Peak KG so it’s not an apples to apples comp

Garnett did well with what he had on Minnesota but so did Moses in Houston. In 82 beating the prime Lakers was probably his career highlight. Garnett never did anything quite like that.

The Timberwolves beat the Sacramento Kings. So yes, he did.

You're thinking of the 81 Lakers. I don't know what you mean by prime as they did not have James Worthy and Magic Johnson was not in his prime.

Because I have a feeling you're going to go there because the Kings are a joke franchise, yes the Kings were that good - look at their record, SRS, and recent playoff experience.

HeartBreakKid wrote:

migya wrote:

ceoofkobefans wrote:
I don’t see how

KG carried a bad Minnesota to the PO almost every year he was in Minnesota and when he was given an ordinary roster he took the Lakers to 6 in the WCF. 83 76ers being vs the 08 Celtics is certainly a debate but That’s peak Moses vs non Peak KG so it’s not an apples to apples comp

Garnett did well with what he had on Minnesota but so did Moses in Houston. In 82 beating the prime Lakers was probably his career highlight. Garnett never did anything quite like that.

The Timberwolves beat the Sacramento Kings. So yes, he did.

You're thinking of the 81 Lakers. I don't know what you mean by prime as they did not have James Worthy and Magic Johnson was not in his prime.

Because I have a feeling you're going to go there because the Kings are a joke franchise, yes the Kings were that good - look at their record, SRS, and recent playoff experience.

I did mean 81 not 82.

The Kings were good nothing else, the 81 Lakers were the defending champs.