Kevin Garnett vs Walt Frazier? Which player would take?

[JordansBulls]

Kevin Garnett vs Walt Frazier? Which player would you rather have?

[mcmasterballer1]

kevin garnett just because i never saw frazier play

[writerman]

I'll go with Frazier.

First off all, he was one of the two of three best pure points to ever play the game. And IMO he was the best of those two or three defensively by a considerable margin.

Garnett is very good, but without even thinking I can name a dozen or more bigs out of NBA history I would take over him. He's not even the best big of this era (I'd take Duncan over him) let alone all time. Anyone who would take him over Kareem or Wilt of DRob or Russell or even peak Shaq is just a flat-out fool.

OTOH, if you know anything about the game, you have to think long and hard before you can even come up with more than a couple of candidates all time who deserve to be mentioned in the same breath with Frazier as a point guard, which is an even more crucial position on a team IMO than any big. He had the total package, and as I said above, none of the other likely candidates approaches him defensively.

[kooldude]

KG for me. I never seen Frazier like the old geezers here , but goes by stats and team success, it's KG for me. Frazier was regarded as a great defensive player but is a guard's defensive impact better than a DPOY winner big that anchored a historic defense? Probably not.

If you replace KG with Frazier and get a PF on the level of Terrell Brandon/Troy Hudson, I don't think the Twolves are going anywhere close to the playoffs.

Frazier is the better playmaker and expectantly so for his position but KG is not exactly miles behind. Frazier had a career-rate of 23% with high at 29%; KG's career of 20% with high of 27%. Pretty comparable when you take in account of position and role.

Writerman brings up KG's ranking among all-time bigs which is true, KG's rank in bigs is significant lower than Frazier's ranking in PGs. But that's kinda biased (yea, yea, I should know that when speaking to the resident Wilt/Frazier homer here). KG's rank in PFs is about the same as Frazier in PGs. But that's irrelevant when we're comparable 2 players where position shouldn't matter. Not to mention that bigs are historically more higher on the all-time lists than guards.

KG has 5 top 5 MVP votings when Frazier only had 1. Big over small in this case imo.

[Point forward]

Frazier. He is better than Garnett on D (YES HE IS), a better leader, a better clutch player and is a very very reliable offensive contributor.

PS when the Knicks won the 1970 NBA title, it was Wilt, Baylor, Erickson, Garrett, West plus Hairston vs Reed, DeBusschere, Bradley, Barnett and Frazier plus Cazzie Russell. Swap Frazier with Garnett and the Knicks are headless chickens b/c Barnett cannot really play PG. Winning Garnett but losing Frazier would be a huge net loss.

[NO-KG-AI]

I find it hard to believe any guard has the impact on a D that a DPOY level big has, sorry.

[writerman]

I find it hard to believe any guard has the impact on a D that a DPOY level big has, sorry.

KG is a good defender and was a very nice fit for Boston's defense, but I think you are really stretching it to call him a DPOY-level defender. He's also not the leader that Frazier was, talks more but has less real killer instinct than Frazier, who had the soul of an asssassin on the basketball court. KG is nowhere near the clutch player Frazier was--he had to be on a team with two other stars to win a ring. As good as Frazier's Knicks were, they never had the level of sheer talent this year's Celtics had. Frazier made them winners in a way that Garnett couldn't make a comparably talented T-Wolf team a few years back.

Garnett is very talented. A leader? No way. Clutch? Not very.

So yes, I'll say it--Frazier had more individual impact than KG has had even as a member of a title team. Frazier was flat out the greater player of the two. It was Pierce who played absolutely out of his mind and made the Celts as good as they were in the playoffs, NOT Garnett. And remember--I'm the guy who usually favors bigs saying that.

[Albanian Damien]

I find it hard to believe any guard has the impact on a D that a DPOY level big has, sorry.

KG is a good defender and was a very nice fit for Boston's defense, but I think you are really stretching it to call him a DPOY-level defender. He's also not the leader that Frazier was, talks more but has less real killer instinct than Frazier, who had the soul of an asssassin on the basketball court. KG is nowhere near the clutch player Frazier was--he had to be on a team with two other stars to win a ring. As good as Frazier's Knicks were, they never had the level of sheer talent this year's Celtics had. Frazier made them winners in a way that Garnett couldn't make a comparably talented T-Wolf team a few years back.

Garnett is very talented. A leader? No way. Clutch? Not very.

So yes, I'll say it--Frazier had more individual impact than KG has had even as a member of a title team. Frazier was flat out the greater player of the two. It was Pierce who played absolutely out of his mind and made the Celts as good as they were in the playoffs, NOT Garnett. And remember--I'm the guy who usually favors bigs saying that.

First off KG is the DPOY so its a true statement to call him a DPOY-level defender. KG's not a leader? He led his team to the finals. He was the only consistent factor. The C really never got Allen and Pierce going at the same time until the finals. KG IS clutch, he earned an unfair reputation of being unclutch in Minny but it's easy to stop one guy for a few minutes since KG was the only one capable of producing on the wolves. Even then KG has had a bunch of clutch games(he undefeated in game 7's). How were any of Frazier's team bad? He had Willis Reed, Jerry Lucas, Dave DeBusschere, Earl Monroe, and Bob McAdoo at different times. You claim THIS celtics had MUCH more talent. KG LED a wolves team with Sam Cassell as it's second best player to the WCF. They would've likely made it to the finals if their PG rotation didn't get injured in the Lakers series. All the claims you made against KG are unfounded.

[kooldude]

I also remember you saying that you would pick Frazier to start a franchise, behind Wilt. That mean you would pass up MJ, Kareem, Magic, and Bird for Frazier.

[WesWesley]

I'll go with Frazier.

First off all, he was one of the two of three best pure points to ever play the game. And IMO he was the best of those two or three defensively by a considerable margin.

Garnett is very good, but without even thinking I can name a dozen or more bigs out of NBA history I would take over him. He's not even the best big of this era (I'd take Duncan over him) let alone all time. Anyone who would take him over Kareem or Wilt of DRob or Russell or even peak Shaq is just a flat-out fool.

OTOH, if you know anything about the game, you have to think long and hard before you can even come up with more than a couple of candidates all time who deserve to be mentioned in the same breath with Frazier as a point guard, which is an even more crucial position on a team IMO than any big. He had the total package, and as I said above, none of the other likely candidates approaches him defensively.

That's only 6 writerman. I would like to hear who else you have on your list? Moses Malone? Karl Malone? Hakeem? Please don't say Sir Charles.

i would put Moses and Hakeem a head of KG, but I would also put all those players a head of Frazier. This means that argument holds no water in this comparison.

[shawngoat23]

Give me Frazier, even though Garnett has improved his legacy tremendously this year.

[NO-KG-AI]

Well I'm glad to know KG isn't a DPOY level defender. I learn something new every day.

[ThaRegul8r]

I also remember you saying that you would pick Frazier to start a franchise, behind Wilt. That mean you would pass up MJ, Kareem, Magic, and Bird for Frazier.

You do realize that in the "who would you pick to start a franchise" question, that the answer depends on the vision each individual has for his franchise? Two people aren't going to build their franchises the same way or have the same philosophy, so their answers are going to be different.

[halfHAVOC]

walt "swishing and dishing" frazier

[ThaRegul8r]

As far as the question goes, Frazier. Frazier's actually my starting point guard on my ideal team using any player in NBA history to pick from (based on MY philosophy and what I want my team to be). Frazier plays DPOY defense and has shown his ability to take over a game in order for his team to win. I actually wouldn't pick Garnett at all for any team I would build. I prefer my big men to be more post-oriented if they're offensive players, and Garnett doesn't do that enough for me (again, MY preference—since the question is asking who would I [or each person who chooses to reply in this thread] take).

[kooldude]

I also remember you saying that you would pick Frazier to start a franchise, behind Wilt. That mean you would pass up MJ, Kareem, Magic, and Bird for Frazier.

You do realize that in the "who would you pick to start a franchise" question, that the answer depends on the vision each individual has for his franchise? Two people aren't going to build their franchises the same way or have the same philosophy, so their answers are going to be different.

so you're basically saying that you would choose an inferior player over a better player if you liked him.

[Fencer reregistered]

Frazier won a championship with 4 other HOFers on his team.

Garnett won with 2.

Well, I guess Rondo could be a HOFer some day, but he's waaay below that level right now.

[Warspite]

Frazier won a championship with 4 other HOFers on his team.

Garnett won with 2.

Well, I guess Rondo could be a HOFer some day, but he's waaay below that level right now.

Am I to assume that Wilt, West, Baylor= Kobe, Odom, Gasol?????

If the teams didnt play simialr opponets your argument is void.


Frazier played on a better team than any today and played vs better teams than any today.
Is that your point your trying to make??

Frazier while holding West to almost 10ppg under his avg scored 44pts and almost a triple double in game 7 and won the title. Frazier is a little overrated being a Knick but from what I have seen he is as good as GP on defense and Isiah on offense. Or for you young people CP3 and Bowen.

[Point forward]

I don't buy that argument that Walt only won b/c of 4 HOFers.

* Willis Reed could not stay healthy. After 1970, he averaged only 13 ppg in his career!
* Dave DeBusschere is a nice PF, but not even NEAR Garnett.
* Bill Bradley is maybe the worst HOFer ever.
* Earl Monroe played a very ensnared role, he scored only 16 ppg in the champ years.

[tracey_nice]

I'll go with Frazier.

First off all, he was one of the two of three best pure points to ever play the game. And IMO he was the best of those two or three defensively by a considerable margin.

Garnett is very good, but without even thinking I can name a dozen or more bigs out of NBA history I would take over him. He's not even the best big of this era (I'd take Duncan over him) let alone all time. Anyone who would take him over Kareem or Wilt of DRob or Russell or even peak Shaq is just a flat-out fool.

OTOH, if you know anything about the game, you have to think long and hard before you can even come up with more than a couple of candidates all time who deserve to be mentioned in the same breath with Frazier as a point guard, which is an even more crucial position on a team IMO than any big. He had the total package, and as I said above, none of the other likely candidates approaches him defensively.

Just because there are more Bigs in the NBA history that you would take over KG, then guards you would take over Frazier doesn't mean anything, except for that there has been more great Bigs then guards.