RealGM

Some great similarities between the two from an impact and team results’ standpoint. Impact signals grade both campaigns rather high, and there’s a good shot that each campaign is the third best from each respective player here. Who would you all prefer and why?

Duncan, for the same reasons I have him higher all-time.

Duncan felt slightly closer to his peak seasons athletically than Garnett to me, this feels like a fairly normal prime season for Duncan, while KG while remarkably effective at it had traded something athletically for an older man game.

Duncan pretty comfortably

2007 Duncan, because in the end, I believe he has more equity as #1 option than Garnett. I think part of this is just informed by Duncan's prior history of being a better PS scorer than Garnett. And I fee like 07 Duncan still was enough in his prime, that I would better on him creating better offense than Garnett.


2007 Duncan in the PS

Adjusted 25.5 pts per 75 (rTS% of 1.9%)


2008 KG in the PS

Adjusted 23.3 pts per 75 (rTS% of 1.1%)


There is a slight difference in their PS scoring, based on these numbers, but I think you run a simulation ,you would see that is the case more times than not.

Interestingly enough, the Celtics did have better PS offense by the numbers than the Spurs. However on the contrary, the Spurs had better PS defense than the Celtics. This is a bit contrary to how I see them, as I have 07 Duncan as the better offensive player, and 08 KG as the better defensive player.

While Duncan was no longer at his peak, and was in the last year of his prime before the injuries slowed him more, it's still Duncan easily.

That Celtics team would have won 50+ games without KG.

LukaTheGOAT wrote:Interestingly enough, the Celtics did have better PS offense by the numbers than the Spurs. However on the contrary, the Spurs had better PS defense than the Celtics. This is a bit contrary to how I see them, as I have 07 Duncan as the better offensive player, and 08 KG as the better defensive player.

Worth noting how the teams did with each guy out there in the playoffs:

Duncan '07 ORtg 109.2 DRtg 103.7 Net Rtg +5.5 On/Off +5.2
Garnett '08 ORtg 111.1 DRtg 100.8 Net Rtg +10.3 On/Off +19.8

Probably assess their on-court value evenly and think they could each win a title in place of the other. Prefer Duncan as a centre and Garnett as a power forward, but think Duncan fares fine as a more dedicated power forward and Garnett fares fine as a more dedicated centre. The usual comments about Garnett being an easier fit on teams still apply, as do the usual comments about Duncan being better able to shoulder a scoring load.

Biggest distinguisher for me is ultimately durability and time played, but in a hypothetical time machine draft, I could understand picking either one.