How many KG years over Peak Ewing?

[Matt15]

How many KG years would you take over Peak Patrick Ewing?

[Warspite]

Most likely none.

A 30ppg C with Defense on par with Hakeem is really hard for a PF to compete with. KG plays the least important position wasting his defense on role players and being the easiest position to double team. On top of that KG just isn't a franchise player on offense and can't carry teams.

[Ol Roy]

Most likely none.

A 30ppg C with Defense on par with Hakeem is really hard for a PF to compete with. KG plays the least important position wasting his defense on role players and being the easiest position to double team. On top of that KG just isn't a franchise player on offense and can't carry teams.

I find this kind of amusing, because the criticism of KG here is almost exactly what Charles Oakley recently said about Ewing. (He was probably too harsh.)

"Patrick was almost like KAT, can't guard the pick and roll, can't hedge, can't get back, just be in harm's way.

Patrick, at the end of the game, he'd get double-teamed. He'd shoot fadeaways on double-teams and that hurt us as a team. We didn't make shots and played into their hands. With defense, they played a zone and built a wall. They knew Patrick wasn't going to pass out of the double-team. Phil watched a lot of films. We watched a lot of films. But we were playing checkers, and they were playing chess.

So a lot of times, we had to try to make up for his mistakes. But he never tried to help up on the other end - Never passed the ball out of the double team."

[LukaTheGOAT]

Honestly, I think 2000-2008 is fair game.

His multi-year peak of 2003-2004 should be a comfortable bet of being over 1990 Ewing.

While I typically get on Garnett's woes as a scoring hub, Ewing is no better. Garrett is clearly the better offensive hub with his passing and spacing he can provide for an offense.

Garnett is also just an outright better defender than Ewing, as crazy as that sounds because Ewing was very good. All it takes is watching one game of each to see the incredible mobility gap between them.

[FuShengTHEGreat]

0....Show me one playoff series from KG in Minnesota as good as Ewing vs heavily favored Boston in 1990? NY had no business even being on the floor with the much more talented Boston Celtics in that series and looked like deer in the headlights the first 2 games.

That for me is the greatest individual underdog comeback playoff performance in NBA history.

He had next to 0 offensive help vs eventual champions Detroit, the only game NY won he put up a sublime 45/13.

[homecourtloss]

Probably a minimum of three all the way up to seven or eight. KG was a better and more impactful player than Ewing.

[Jaivl]

The rare occasion when KG compares favorably scoring-wise to another all-timer he's being compared to. It's a no contest for me. Basically all of his prime.

0....Show me one playoff series from KG in Minnesota as good as Ewing vs heavily favored Boston in 1990?

Kevin Garnett never scored +30 ppg on a playoff series against a geriatric team. That's a somewhat valid point at least.

[migya]

Garnett was a better passer and more versatile than Ewing but he was not better overall defensively impactly and not all that close as a scorer to Ewing. Ewing was a better shooter also, the strength in scoring Garnett has over many bigs. Pretty different players actually. Garnett can't be the best scorer on a team with little scoring help, yet Ewing can and was, with a successful team. Peak for Peak, it's close. Ewing in 1990 was the only thing keeping the Knicks from being a bottom four or five team, they were that awful, particularly offensively.

[Owly]

The rare occasion when KG compares favorably scoring-wise to another all-timer he's being compared to. It's a no contest for me. Basically all of his prime.

0....Show me one playoff series from KG in Minnesota as good as Ewing vs heavily favored Boston in 1990?

Kevin Garnett never scored +30 ppg on a playoff series against a geriatric team. That's a somewhat valid point at least.

It's accurate. Valid would depend as to what the point is in support of.

Briefly and whilst this is just one stat but based on game BPMs and minutes I calculated his series BPM to be 5.681818182 (very slightly below the unweighted average of his game BPMs of 5.76; a little above his overall BPM for that playoffs of 5.2. All those numbers are below every playoffs BPM for Garnett between 1999 and 2008 (though his teams don't make it 2005-2007). That's only one measure - his PER is stronger though that's even more limited in accounting for defense (maybe one could argue to the extent DBPM is "guessing" that's a good thing). One would have to watch the games but at a team level (Boston's 119.3 Ortg; .548 fg%; .558 efg%) and presumably individual matchup level (Parish's 126 [Box/Reference] Ortg; .574 Efg% [.638 TS%]; 18.3 ORrb%) don't look great and may contribute to a relatively weak defensive side box aggregates.

This isn't to say one metric is perfect (indeed I don't love that BPM varies by position), that Ewing's defense is bad etc. But Garnett does already have the better RS numbers and the confidence of huge impact numbers around his apex. Ewing has that high PER for that run but even that ... has the downside of that metric sees the '90 playoffs as an outlier (next highest being 21.6 in '93 - whilst Garnett hovers around 24 in the playoffs for his prime) and so whilst supporting Ewing's case with regard playoff peak, would hurt his case for playoff prime.

[Red Beast]

I can't see how Garnett can be seen as having a greater defensive impact than Ewing. Versatility is useful, but it does not trump elite rim protection. Ewing is a massively underrated defensive presence. I view him as a tier above Garnett for defensive effectiveness.

In Garnett's first 12 years in the NBA (his prime), he was involved in two top ten defenses, the highest being 6th. In those 12 years, he was part of a defense ranked 15th or less 9 times.

In Ewing's first 12 years he was involved in 9 top ten defenses, 7 top 5 defenses, 5 top 2 defenses and 3 number 1 defenses. Some will point to good defensive teammates. This is true, but not in all cases. In Ewing's rookie year (85/86) he led a team of very average players to a 5th place defense. The year before the team ranked 19th of 23.

While KG did have some poor teams, they were not all bad. They were definitely not all bad defensively. Yet, he never had the individual impact on defense to improve the overall effectiveness of the team defense. If he was better defensively than Ewing (ludicrous in my opinion) why did he have that many average or flat out bad defensive teams?

[FuShengTHEGreat]

The rare occasion when KG compares favorably scoring-wise to another all-timer he's being compared to. It's a no contest for me. Basically all of his prime.

0....Show me one playoff series from KG in Minnesota as good as Ewing vs heavily favored Boston in 1990?

Kevin Garnett never scored +30 ppg on a playoff series against a geriatric team. That's a somewhat valid point at least.

Forget not averaging 30ppg in a playoff series, KG never once even scored 40 points in a playoff game in his entire career.

Put KG on that 90 NY team in Ewings shoes and they get swept under the rug. Boston had 3 all stars and a emerging Reggie Lewis, meanwhile the next best Knicks was like Johnny Newman (who? lol) That was one of THE most heroic performances in NBA history.

What great defensive advantages did KG have over Ewing? He wasnt a overly imposing rim protector/shotblocker...Versatility and mobility that led to mostly middling defensively ranked teams? Bah humbug! Not game changing enough imho.

[eminence]

Just so I have this straight.

Age 19 - 10/6, started ~1/2 his games, 26 win '96 Wolves = Prime KG
Age 31 - 19/9, led 66 win Boston to the title while winning DPOY and finishing 3rd in MVP voting =/= prime KG

Weird.

[Red Beast]

Just so I have this straight.

Age 19 - 10/6, started ~1/2 his games, 26 win '96 Wolves = Prime KG
Age 31 - 19/9, led 66 win Boston to the title while winning DPOY and finishing 3rd in MVP voting =/= prime KG

Weird.

Not sure what point you are making. No one is saying that his age 19 year is his prime. Most players have their defensive primes when they are younger. Either way, that isn't the point. KG is a great defensive player. In my opinion, he is in the top ten of great defensive power forwards. This notwithstanding, his inability to impact defenses for the Wolves is telling, particularly when you compare him to the great defensive centers.

How do you explain it?

[eminence]

Just so I have this straight.

Age 19 - 10/6, started ~1/2 his games, 26 win '96 Wolves = Prime KG
Age 31 - 19/9, led 66 win Boston to the title while winning DPOY and finishing 3rd in MVP voting =/= prime KG

Weird.

Not sure what point you are making. No one is saying that his age 19 year is his prime. Most players have their defensive primes when they are younger. Either way, that isn't the point. KG is a great defensive player. In my opinion, he is in the top ten of great defensive power forwards. This notwithstanding, his inability to impact defenses for the Wolves is telling, particularly when you compare him to the great defensive centers.

How do you explain it?

Brother, you literally just said it.

"In Garnett's first 12 years in the NBA (his prime), he was involved in two top ten defenses, the highest being 6th. In those 12 years, he was part of a defense ranked 15th or less 9 times."

[Owly]

Just so I have this straight.

Age 19 - 10/6, started ~1/2 his games, 26 win '96 Wolves = Prime KG
Age 31 - 19/9, led 66 win Boston to the title while winning DPOY and finishing 3rd in MVP voting =/= prime KG

Weird.

Not sure what point you are making. No one is saying that his age 19 year is his prime. ...

The poster suggest you are saying it is part of it. And you'll forgive the confusion ...

In Garnett's first 12 years in the NBA (his prime)

Especially when you still seem to be trying to broadly defend it with this ...

Most players have their defensive primes when they are younger.

At 19 though?

his inability to impact defenses for the Wolves is telling

That seems to be somewhere between not knowing of better tools or not caring. For an 11 year spell (97-2007 i.e. from the start of the play by play era to his departure) Minnesota do 12.2 points better overall with him on the court. Long term RAPM studies show him to be a substantially impactful player. Looking at at 97-14 (Googlesites), 97-22 and 97-24 (w playoffs) RAPM all have him as one of the best defenders over that span (7th, 3rd, 1st) and generating the larger proportion of his impact on defense (roughly between a little under 2/3s to approaching 3/4 - eyeballing the numbers).

[Red Beast]

Just so I have this straight.

Age 19 - 10/6, started ~1/2 his games, 26 win '96 Wolves = Prime KG
Age 31 - 19/9, led 66 win Boston to the title while winning DPOY and finishing 3rd in MVP voting =/= prime KG

Weird.

Not sure what point you are making. No one is saying that his age 19 year is his prime. ...

The poster suggest you are saying it is part of it. And you'll forgive the confusion ...

In Garnett's first 12 years in the NBA (his prime)

Especially when you still seem to be trying to broadly defend it with this ...

Most players have their defensive primes when they are younger.

At 19 though?

his inability to impact defenses for the Wolves is telling

That seems to be somewhere between not knowing of better tools or not caring. For an 11 year spell (97-2007 i.e. from the start of the play by play era to his departure) Minnesota do 12.2 points better overall with him on the court. Long term RAPM studies show him to be a substantially impactful player. Looking at at 97-14 (Googlesites), 97-22 and 97-24 (w playoffs) RAPM all have him as one of the best defenders over that span (7th, 3rd, 1st) and generating the larger proportion of his impact on defense (roughly between a little under 2/3s to approaching 3/4 - eyeballing the numbers).

I will not engage further in the 19-year-old matter, it is nonsense. I stated in his first 12 years. If you are telling me that players are not better defensively in their first 12 years, well, I can't have a serious discussion with you. Either way, it is a straw man argument with no value.

I am not suggesting KG is not a great defender. He absolutely is. He just isn't as impactful as Ewing. RAPM is a highly limited stat. It is interesting but not one that I put great faith in to compare players with. I don't dismiss it, but it is not a comprehensive measure to be used for player comparison. By the way, what is Ewing's RAPM?

Again, how can the defenses KG was on while at Minnesota be explained? How could he not elevate defenses when great rim protecting big men like Ewing, Robinson, Duncan, Russell and Olajuwan could?

[Ol Roy]

There was a great article on KG's 2008 defensive impact numbers, beyond just on/off. I think it went into opponent scoring percentages and such. I could have sworn it was on ESPN, but I can't find it. Anybody know what I'm talking about?

[One_and_Done]

I guess all KGs prime seasons, so from 99 or 00 to about 08.

I find Ewing to be a hugely overrated player.

[Top10alltime]

0....Show me one playoff series from KG as good as Ewing vs heavily favored Boston in 1990? NY had no business even being on the floor with the much more talented Boston Celtics in that series and looked like deer in the headlights the first 2 games.

That for me is the greatest individual underdog comeback playoff performance in NBA history.

He had next to 0 offensive help vs eventual champions Detroit, the only game NY won he put up a sublime 45/13.

Ewing 90 1st rd: 28.2 OA pts/75 on +7.4 opp adj rTS
KG 08 ECF: 28.1 OA pts/75 on +6.7 opp adj rTS

WOW! What a big difference!

Yeah, no. A 32 year old KG who wasn't even having the most offensive role on his team, and wasn't at his peak in scoring, was similar to a 28 yr old Ewing at his offensive peak with a trash team vs an old ahh Celtics. It's not close.

Give me 2000-08, 10, and 12 over 90 Ewing. Argument for 99, 11, and 13 as well.

So as much as 14 years over peak Ewing. I side around 11 years.

[Top10alltime]

I can't see how Garnett can be seen as having a greater defensive impact than Ewing. Versatility is useful, but it does not trump elite rim protection. Ewing is a massively underrated defensive presence. I view him as a tier above Garnett for defensive effectiveness.

In Garnett's first 12 years in the NBA (his prime), he was involved in two top ten defenses, the highest being 6th. In those 12 years, he was part of a defense ranked 15th or less 9 times.

In Ewing's 1987-91 he had defenses that ranked 20th, 7th, 10th, 13th, and 12th in the league. I can cherrypick too.

Defense with KG on:
Celtics without KG: +0.4 defense
2008: -9.9 defense
2009: -9.6 defense
2010: -5.7 defense
2011: -9.5 defense
2012: -6.6 defense
2013: -6.6 defense
KG leaves: +1.0 defense

KG in 2008-13 had finally gotten good defensive teammates. And he went the distance. That's higher than Ewing's -8.3, and -8.1 defenses at his peak.

KG in 2003-04 took a team that consisted of Sam Cassell, Latrell Sprewell, Trenton Hassell, Wally Szceribak, and Fred Hoiberg (who? ) to a +5.7 rORtg and -4.0 rDRtg (66 win pace). In comparison, wing took the 1989-90 Knicks with Maurice Cheeks, who is a 7th option on the Knicks and better than KG's second option, to a +1.3 offense and a -0.1 defense (46 win pace)
KG from his first 7 seasons took this same team to the playoffs 7x straight. Give KG Charles Oakley, Maurice Cheeks, Mark Jackson, and Kiki Vandeweghe and a bunch of good role players and he goes the distance.
Give Ewing Sam Cassell (literally the only relevant player on the roster), with a bunch of bums and they get a top pick.

KG is easily better defensively