Dirk and KG playoffs against Pau Gasol

[Texas Chuck]

Not to add fuel to the fire, but I never checked this combination on pbpstats (nor have I seen it anywhere) and I was curious. Small sample size alert re/ KG off:

2004 Sam Cassell with KG ON -- 22.3 points per 75 on 57.3 TS%, 8.0 assists 3.1 TOs, +10.5 (2977 min)
2004 Sam Cassell with KG OFF -- 23.6 points per 75 on 48.0 TS%, 7.1 assists 3.6 TOs, -7.8 (369 min)

2004 KG with Sam Cassell ON -- 23.9 points per 75 on 53.7 TS%, 5.1 assists 2.8 TOs, +10.5 (2977 min)
2004 KG with Sam Cassell OFF -- 25.3 points per 75 on 54.2 TS%, 4.7 assists 3.1 TOs, +1.8 (1042 min)

Just so we are clear, I've never argued Cassell was anywhere near KG's level that year. Just that he was really good. He was also really good throughout his career. Go look at the team 's success in the Cassell years compared to the years before and after. It's quite stark. It's clear this guy was really beneficial to winning games.

I mean we can't ignore the only season the Wolves made a deep run in their franchise history was the full year he was there. And that they ultimately lost after he hurt himself doing the dance. He was absolutely vital to that team. Way different from Spree.

[Wooderson]

Not to add fuel to the fire, but I never checked this combination on pbpstats (nor have I seen it anywhere) and I was curious. Small sample size alert re/ KG off:

2004 Sam Cassell with KG ON -- 22.3 points per 75 on 57.3 TS%, 8.0 assists 3.1 TOs, +10.5 (2977 min)
2004 Sam Cassell with KG OFF -- 23.6 points per 75 on 48.0 TS%, 7.1 assists 3.6 TOs, -7.8 (369 min)

2004 KG with Sam Cassell ON -- 23.9 points per 75 on 53.7 TS%, 5.1 assists 2.8 TOs, +10.5 (2977 min)
2004 KG with Sam Cassell OFF -- 25.3 points per 75 on 54.2 TS%, 4.7 assists 3.1 TOs, +1.8 (1042 min)

Just so we are clear, I've never argued Cassell was anywhere near KG's level that year. Just that he was really good. He was also really good throughout his career. Go look at the team 's success in the Cassell years compared to the years before and after. It's quite stark. It's clear this guy was really beneficial to winning games.

I mean we can't ignore the only season the Wolves made a deep run in their franchise history was the full year he was there. And that they ultimately lost after he hurt himself doing the dance. He was absolutely vital to that team. Way different from Spree.

Yeah Cassell was really good for one of his two years in Minny, before falling off a cliff in 2005. So basically every year KG's Wolves supporting casts ended up being awful if the bar is championship given Cassell's playoff injury in 2004.

[HeartBreakKid]

Sam Cassell was good but also kind of shows how bad the Wolves are that he is the high point.

Realistically speaking if you made a player comparison with Sam Cassell and like...99% of the players who have threads about them in this section he would lose in all of them and lose badly. Even if he were underrated he barely played with Garnett.

The gap between Sam Cassell and everyone else was really large too. The couple other decent players left as soon as they got good.

[Texas Chuck]

Not interested in another discussion about KG played with the worst supporting casts ever. My only point is to defend Sam Cassell who was really good that year(and over the course of his career). I don't care if he didn't have the same level of career of Kobe Bryant or Wilt.

And it seems like I could point that out without this rush to say see how bad KG had it. Trust me I already know how badly everyone thinks he had it. You don't have to explain it to me again . I promise I got it.

[Owly]

Not to add fuel to the fire, but I never checked this combination on pbpstats (nor have I seen it anywhere) and I was curious. Small sample size alert re/ KG off:

2004 Sam Cassell with KG ON -- 22.3 points per 75 on 57.3 TS%, 8.0 assists 3.1 TOs, +10.5 (2977 min)
2004 Sam Cassell with KG OFF -- 23.6 points per 75 on 48.0 TS%, 7.1 assists 3.6 TOs, -7.8 (369 min)

2004 KG with Sam Cassell ON -- 23.9 points per 75 on 53.7 TS%, 5.1 assists 2.8 TOs, +10.5 (2977 min)
2004 KG with Sam Cassell OFF -- 25.3 points per 75 on 54.2 TS%, 4.7 assists 3.1 TOs, +1.8 (1042 min)

Am I misreading or does this have KG at 4000+ minutes?

[Jaivl]

Not to add fuel to the fire, but I never checked this combination on pbpstats (nor have I seen it anywhere) and I was curious. Small sample size alert re/ KG off:

2004 Sam Cassell with KG ON -- 22.3 points per 75 on 57.3 TS%, 8.0 assists 3.1 TOs, +10.5 (2977 min)
2004 Sam Cassell with KG OFF -- 23.6 points per 75 on 48.0 TS%, 7.1 assists 3.6 TOs, -7.8 (369 min)

2004 KG with Sam Cassell ON -- 23.9 points per 75 on 53.7 TS%, 5.1 assists 2.8 TOs, +10.5 (2977 min)
2004 KG with Sam Cassell OFF -- 25.3 points per 75 on 54.2 TS%, 4.7 assists 3.1 TOs, +1.8 (1042 min)

Am I misreading or does this have KG at 4000+ minutes?

RS+PO

Not to add fuel to the fire, but I never checked this combination on pbpstats (nor have I seen it anywhere) and I was curious. Small sample size alert re/ KG off:

2004 Sam Cassell with KG ON -- 22.3 points per 75 on 57.3 TS%, 8.0 assists 3.1 TOs, +10.5 (2977 min)
2004 Sam Cassell with KG OFF -- 23.6 points per 75 on 48.0 TS%, 7.1 assists 3.6 TOs, -7.8 (369 min)

2004 KG with Sam Cassell ON -- 23.9 points per 75 on 53.7 TS%, 5.1 assists 2.8 TOs, +10.5 (2977 min)
2004 KG with Sam Cassell OFF -- 25.3 points per 75 on 54.2 TS%, 4.7 assists 3.1 TOs, +1.8 (1042 min)

Just so we are clear, I've never argued Cassell was anywhere near KG's level that year.

???

[dygaction]

Sam Cassell was good but also kind of shows how bad the Wolves are that he is the high point.

Realistically speaking if you made a player comparison with Sam Cassell and like...99% of the players who have threads about them in this section he would lose in all of them and lose badly. Even if he were underrated he barely played with Garnett.

The gap between Sam Cassell and everyone else was really large too. The couple other decent players left as soon as they got good.

yes, we get that and saw what TWolves could do the next three years.

[dygaction]

What's hilarious is that Pierce and Allen are deemed superstars and superteam level help, despite them not even being in their peak when they got together, and also they have between them: 4 all NBA 3rd team, and 2 all NBA 2nd team finishes, and neither has a top 5 MVP finish in their entire career. KG alone has more top 2 MVP finishes than the other two have all NBA 2nd team appearances. You can definitely do worse, but this revisionist history of Pierce and Allen being this god level help, or guys carrying KG (The leading scorer and 4th quarter scorer on the title team as well, lol) offensively is ridiculous. They have a single top 10 MVP finish between the two of them (Allen at 9).

Can anyone guess who this duo of 2nd and 3rd stars with a similar resume' is? 4 all NBA 3rd team finishes, 2 all NBA 2nd team finishes, and 1 top 5 MVP finish between the two in their career. I'll give you a hint, they aren't considered stars, or a super supporting cast.

They are superstars (depending on how many superstars you want to handout a time) and formed a superteam with three HOFs-to-be at that time. You don't have to downplay KG's teammates to elevate him. Pierce 10x all-star and 4x all-nba, Ray 10x all star and 2x all-nba. All three of them were still at their prime. You can see at the time "Big three" "Three-headed monster", Robert Parish, McHale, and Bird comparison. Chris Bosh had one all-nba selection, Kevin Love had one all-nba selection in their entire career but they were part of the big three (Kyrie has 3x all-nba now), because they were unquestionably franchise players of another team - Each team is supposed to only develop and have one of those so it is unfair and supernova team if you assemble a team with 3.

It is just an easier or shortcut way of forming a winning team by forming a superteam. The "big three" idea is currently rejected because they way underachieved, a big part due to KG could not stay healthy. When there is too little to share among all, the pointing figure things start.

KG could easily have proven himself to be the far best player on that team and won Finals MVP that year. His defense was clearly better, so as long as he did not use 19% more shots (105 FGA vs. 88 PP) to score 20% less points (109 vs. 131 PP). If it were not for Pierce and Allen's much superior efficiency and higher scoring volume than KG, Kobe would have 3-peated. His comparison is similar to Wallace in 04 - great defensively and deserve to be in the conversation of Finals MVP, but don't act as if he was robbed of it.

Watch on YouTube

I never said anything about the finals MVP. KG was the best offensive and defensive player on the team. It's closer on offense than defense, but that's all. He was far and away the best player on that team, and the gap between himself and his 2nd and 3rd in terms of their contributions was comparable to a lot of guys that don't get dinged for great teammates. Them being in their prime is also very dubious, particularly for KG and Allen who weren't close to their peak athleticism, and in KG's case, had his metrics dropping for a few years with age and knee problems beginning to crop up.

It's not uprising though, it's like how people have repainted hte 03-04 Timberwolves as having 3 superstars as well. Y'all have a very loose definition of superstar if guys that have never made all NBA first team, or ever had a serious MVP vote are superstars and devalue your titles as the 2nd best player.

What is your support though? At most you can say he has an argument. Over the entire 08 regular & playoff combined, Pierce scored more, at a higher efficiency; had the ball and assisted more; got to the free throw line more; had better OWS...

All big 3s need to sacrifice metrics for playing together. The same happened for Allen, Pierce, LeBron, Wade, and Bosh. The metrics drop really is a result of players find their positions in the team. For KG, he did have a slightly higher TS% at a reduced offense load.

[Jaivl]

Yeah I would disagree with the notion that KG was the best offensive player on the 08 Celtics (Pierce) - he's not too far off, though, and his defensive edge is about ten times as big (not being facetious).

After the 09 injury he of course has no real argument.

[trex_8063]

Dirk has always been an absolute nightmare to Pau head to head, both in the NBA and Intl play.

KG easily outplayed him in his prime (08) and got outplayed on his post-injury slump year (10).

Dirk is a much better scorer than KG.

...Yay?

I would not say KG "easily" outplay Gasol in 08? Offensively I would rather take the 14.7ppg/.57TS% than 18.4ppg/.47TS%. KG just got more help than Gasol that year.

In the finals, Pierce averaged 21.8ppg with .59TS%, Ray averaged 20.3ppg with .71TS%, and KG averaged 18.2 with .47TS%. That's -.23TS% compared to Allen - KG took 105 shots (vs. 73 for Ray) to score 109points (vs. 122 for Ray). Posey also shot the light out with .78TS%. It would have been a lot easier to win if KG gave up more shot attempts to other players and focused more on D. When was last time a player who took the most shots in a series scored #3 (#9 in TS%) on the team but that team actually won? You need elite scoring carry job from the teammates. While we cannot ignore KG's elite defense, his liability on offense should really get noticed. He also had 18 assist / 16 TOs / 16 PFs in that 6 games.

Wait, are you implying he was neglecting his defense?.......in the series where they held the Lakers to -9.1 ORtg relative to their rs standard (and his sometimes assignment Gasol avg 14.7 pts @ 57.2% TS with 3.3 ast and 2.2 tov [vs. rs averages of 18.8 pts @ 63.9% TS, 3.5 ast, and 1.6 tov]).

Was that also a carry-job by his teammates?

[dygaction]

Dirk has always been an absolute nightmare to Pau head to head, both in the NBA and Intl play.

KG easily outplayed him in his prime (08) and got outplayed on his post-injury slump year (10).

Dirk is a much better scorer than KG.

...Yay?

I would not say KG "easily" outplay Gasol in 08? Offensively I would rather take the 14.7ppg/.57TS% than 18.4ppg/.47TS%. KG just got more help than Gasol that year.

In the finals, Pierce averaged 21.8ppg with .59TS%, Ray averaged 20.3ppg with .71TS%, and KG averaged 18.2 with .47TS%. That's -.23TS% compared to Allen - KG took 105 shots (vs. 73 for Ray) to score 109points (vs. 122 for Ray). Posey also shot the light out with .78TS%. It would have been a lot easier to win if KG gave up more shot attempts to other players and focused more on D. When was last time a player who took the most shots in a series scored #3 (#9 in TS%) on the team but that team actually won? You need elite scoring carry job from the teammates. While we cannot ignore KG's elite defense, his liability on offense should really get noticed. He also had 18 assist / 16 TOs / 16 PFs in that 6 games.

Wait, are you implying he was neglecting his defense?.......in the series where they held the Lakers to -9.1 ORtg relative to their rs standard (and his sometimes assignment Gasol avg 14.7 pts @ 57.2% TS with 3.3 ast and 2.2 tov [vs. rs averages of 18.8 pts @ 63.9% TS, 3.5 ast, and 1.6 tov]).

Was that also a carry-job by his teammates?

The defense was always teamwork and team was loaded with good defensive players, but I always acknowledge KG was by far the best defensive player and leader on the 08 Celtics team, or the entire league. That would not change he used too many possessions and field goal attempts to score inefficiently.

[70sFan]

I would not say KG "easily" outplay Gasol in 08? Offensively I would rather take the 14.7ppg/.57TS% than 18.4ppg/.47TS%. KG just got more help than Gasol that year.

In the finals, Pierce averaged 21.8ppg with .59TS%, Ray averaged 20.3ppg with .71TS%, and KG averaged 18.2 with .47TS%. That's -.23TS% compared to Allen - KG took 105 shots (vs. 73 for Ray) to score 109points (vs. 122 for Ray). Posey also shot the light out with .78TS%. It would have been a lot easier to win if KG gave up more shot attempts to other players and focused more on D. When was last time a player who took the most shots in a series scored #3 (#9 in TS%) on the team but that team actually won? You need elite scoring carry job from the teammates. While we cannot ignore KG's elite defense, his liability on offense should really get noticed. He also had 18 assist / 16 TOs / 16 PFs in that 6 games.

Wait, are you implying he was neglecting his defense?.......in the series where they held the Lakers to -9.1 ORtg relative to their rs standard (and his sometimes assignment Gasol avg 14.7 pts @ 57.2% TS with 3.3 ast and 2.2 tov [vs. rs averages of 18.8 pts @ 63.9% TS, 3.5 ast, and 1.6 tov]).

Was that also a carry-job by his teammates?

The defense was always teamwork and team was loaded with good defensive players, but I always acknowledge KG was by far the best defensive player and leader on the 08 Celtics team, or the entire league. That would not change he used too many possessions and field goal attempts to score inefficiently.

The offense is always teamwork too.

[dygaction]

Wait, are you implying he was neglecting his defense?.......in the series where they held the Lakers to -9.1 ORtg relative to their rs standard (and his sometimes assignment Gasol avg 14.7 pts @ 57.2% TS with 3.3 ast and 2.2 tov [vs. rs averages of 18.8 pts @ 63.9% TS, 3.5 ast, and 1.6 tov]).

Was that also a carry-job by his teammates?

The defense was always teamwork and team was loaded with good defensive players, but I always acknowledge KG was by far the best defensive player and leader on the 08 Celtics team, or the entire league. That would not change he used too many possessions and field goal attempts to score inefficiently.

The offense is always teamwork too.

Yep, so let the better player who are good at certain areas get the deserved credit. I applauded KG for his great defense.

[NO-KG-AI]

The defense was always teamwork and team was loaded with good defensive players, but I always acknowledge KG was by far the best defensive player and leader on the 08 Celtics team, or the entire league. That would not change he used too many possessions and field goal attempts to score inefficiently.

The offense is always teamwork too.

Yep, so let the better player who are good at certain areas get the deserved credit. I applauded KG for his great defense.

I actually think the Celtics were massively over achieving on defense, and under achieving on offense... relative to the talent on both ends at least. I guess you could actually use their offensive performance as a point to ding KG, Pierce, and Allen, or whoever you choose. I personally wouldn't go that route.

On the flip side, Thibs has some history getting teams to play above their head defensively. I think what we saw was an all time great defensive anchor and a guy that historically squeezes every drop from good defenders and even guys that usually don't play good defense normally. And it produced an all time, historically great defensive team. I think if you put them up to the other contenders as the best defense ever, they are much less talented defensively though.

Like I said though, I think much less talented offensive teams(I think KG, Pierce, and Allen have all led better offenses IIRC) have produced better on that end. But at the end of the day, I guess the net rating is all that really matters, and they were trouncing people, so I guess it doesn't really matter.

[dygaction]

The offense is always teamwork too.

Yep, so let the better player who are good at certain areas get the deserved credit. I applauded KG for his great defense.

I actually think the Celtics were massively over achieving on defense, and under achieving on offense... relative to the talent on both ends at least. I guess you could actually use their offensive performance as a point to ding KG, Pierce, and Allen, or whoever you choose. I personally wouldn't go that route.

On the flip side, Thibs has some history getting teams to play above their head defensively. I think what we saw was an all time great defensive anchor and a guy that historically squeezes every drop from good defenders and even guys that usually don't play good defense normally. And it produced an all time, historically great defensive team. I think if you put them up to the other contenders as the best defense ever, they are much less talented defensively though.

Like I said though, I think much less talented offensive teams(I think KG, Pierce, and Allen have all led better offenses IIRC) have produced better on that end. But at the end of the day, I guess the net rating is all that really matters, and they were trouncing people, so I guess it doesn't really matter.

Defense can be relatively easier to enhance than offense by having a great coach/leader (KG is vocal and lead with example), increasing play intensity, and getting everyone motivated. Under Thibs they did achieve historically great defense but they also had the other defense talents in Posey, Tony Allen, Perkins, Rondo, Pierce, and Ray... Offense are more difficult to teach, such as shooting touch and passing, just think about how many great players struggle to make free throws consistently.

If you are a great offensive team, you need to score a lot to make up the points you give up on the defensive end; if you are a great defensive team, you can afford to score less. Like you said net rating, or in another word, outscore your opponents, are what matters.