KG vs Duncan

[iamworthy]

While Tim Duncan is a Great player, probably the best PF to ever play the game IMO. Is he just a product of a Good Organization and a Great Coach? If Kevin Garnett was placed in the same position as Tim Duncan coming out of the draft would he be as successful? KG is more athletic, can play on the post and the wing, and while Duncan can do some of the same things KG can play like a 6’7 guard or like a 7’ footer down low. They both play very good Defense but again I have to give the nod to KG because of his athletic ability. For the first time in years KG was motivated to play and we saw the outcome….DPOY and Championship. Not counting rings, because rings are a product of a great organization and great team, who is the better basketball player?

[thegreatblaze]

Tim Duncan is a product of hard work and determination.

Not counting rings, because rings are a product of a great organization and great team, who is the better basketball player?

Tim Duncan.

[iamworthy]

Tim Duncan is a product of hard work and determination.

Not counting rings, because rings are a product of a great organization and great team, who is the better basketball player?

Tim Duncan.

I guess you did answer the topic question...lol. I was kinda looking for something about the talents between KG and Duncan.

[thegreatblaze]

I just like Duncan's style/philosophy more. He's a classic low-post player, and he rarely fades to the perimeter like Garnett. He's a better defender (it's blasphemy that he hasn't received a DPOY). He has proven to be more clutch and consistent.

I prefer Duncan operating in the post over Garnett's perimeter oriented game. If I had to start a franchise I'd choose Duncan.

[iamworthy]

I just like Duncan's style/philosophy more. He's a classic low-post player, and he rarely fades to the perimeter like Garnett. He's a better defender (it's blasphemy that he hasn't received a DPOY). He has proven to be more clutch and consistent.

I prefer Duncan operating in the post over Garnett's perimeter oriented game. If I had to start a franchise I'd choose Duncan.

I agree with everything you said. I just can get over the fact that I think KG's career was a waist because he was being coached by Flip Saunders, who is a horrible coach IMO. I just sometimes wonder how KG's career would have turned out had he played for and elite coach. He has the skills to do just about anything on the court. But had no coach to instill discipline in him. Tim Duncan is still getting yelled at by Pop, as he should if he does something wrong. I doubt any coach has every yelled at KG.

[Cevap]

Comparing KG to Duncan is same as comparing Kobe to MJ....Duncan is on a whole another level

[iamworthy]

Its hard to compare players because most people cannot seperate a team achievement(championships) from just a flat out basketball player. And in most cases you'll find that the player with the better team usually is the consensus better player. And his team is better because of course that great player made them better. Which I laugh at everytime. At the end of the day I think KG is more talented but Duncan is a better basketball player and I contribute Duncans being a better basketball player to college and Greg Popovich. You can have all the talent in the world but if your not coached you can forget about it. Oh, and yes I contribute Kobe and MJ's success to Phil Jackson. Without Phil Kobe and MJ are two talented guys scoreing 50 a night and losing.

[ronnymac2]

I just like Duncan's style/philosophy more. He's a classic low-post player, and he rarely fades to the perimeter like Garnett. He's a better defender (it's blasphemy that he hasn't received a DPOY). He has proven to be more clutch and consistent.

I prefer Duncan operating in the post over Garnett's perimeter oriented game. If I had to start a franchise I'd choose Duncan.

I agree with everything you said. I just can get over the fact that I think KG's career was a waist because he was being coached by Flip Saunders, who is a horrible coach IMO. I just sometimes wonder how KG's career would have turned out had he played for and elite coach. He has the skills to do just about anything on the court. But had no coach to instill discipline in him. Tim Duncan is still getting yelled at by Pop, as he should if he does something wrong. I doubt any coach has every yelled at KG.

I agree with your argument that if KG had the same great situation that Duncan has had, he'd have had a lot more success. I don't like that your thinking KG is undisciplined, however. Kg is one of the most intense, competitive players in the league who constantly looks for his faults from game to game and tries to improve them. He always gives 110%, and has a great track record of playing most of his teams games per season. He also has a strong work ethic. During a practice this season, Kg was doing some after practice work on the court. After he was done, he REBOUNDED for 45 minutes while rajon rondo practiced shooting. What former MVP and superstar would do that for a teammate? And KG has always been motivated, too.

Again, I like your argument a lot. I do think Duncan is better and would take him over Kg, but the perception of KG not being on Duncan's level has always seemed to me more because of career accomplishments and accolades, things that aren't 100% in either players' control. Duncan is better, and not just because of those career accomplishments and titles. But is is fairly close (not the titles and career part, i mean the player vs. player comparison part.)

Cevap, explain how Duncan is on a whole other level please?

[That Nicka]

Comparing KG to Duncan is same as comparing Kobe to MJ....Duncan is on a whole another level

I dunno if KG and Duncan are as far apart as Kobe and MJ but I agree

[Cevap]

Cevap, explain how Duncan is on a whole other level please?

OK, where to start? A previous poster mentioned how Duncan is better due to Popovich and having spend 4 years in college. Popovich was a second year Head Coach when Duncan was drafted. I firmly believe that Duncan helped out Popovich more then vice versa. I think popovich had the luxury of having Duncan on his team while he learned the coaching on the job. Duncan came into the league dominant and was ready to step into the limelight due to his years at Wake Forest. Now KG also had the option of going to any college in the country and learn the fundamentals but he chose the NBA and the paying contracts. This is the decision he thought is best in his interest and he has to live with it.

Now why Duncan is on another level....well considering the fact that he won 4 championships as the undisputed go-to-guy has something to do with it. He was the only one who could play against prime Shaq and beat him. He was the guy who knocked off the dynasty Lakers. After beating the Lakers, he was the guy who won a championship with a Parker who averaged 15 and 3 and Ginobli who averaged 9-4-3. KG needed two maximum contract players to win a championship after 26!!! playoff games...the longest in history. This team KG had was unarguably the best either of them had. And he still needed the most games ever to win a chip.

KG couldn't do anything in Minnesota except keep the team respectable or below average. He had similar teams to what Duncan had in 2002-03 and Duncan won a chip while KG was brushed off in the first round. In that final against the Nets, he posted some ridiculous averages like 25-20-5-5. He was their go to guy in the clutch, he was their defensive anchor, he was their playmakes, he was everything they needed him to be and then some. Don't believe me? Look up the box scores, i mean it's ridiculous. That final firmly sealed Duncan's place from the KG debate into the Top 10 all time one.

While one might say KG's skilset is more unique then Duncan's, I'd take the classic PF-C and build around him.

[shawngoat23]

It's possible that KG could have done everything Duncan did, or perhaps more. But he could also have failed miserably. We can only judge players based on what they did with their situation. Otherwise, Barkley, Malone, Baylor, and Robinson are likely regarded as top 10 players as well, and Ewing might be top 15. It's not fair, but that's life.

[NO-KG-AI]

It's possible that KG could have done everything Duncan did, or perhaps more. But he could also have failed miserably. We can only judge players based on what they did with their situation. Otherwise, Barkley, Malone, Baylor, and Robinson are likely regarded as top 10 players as well, and Ewing might be top 15. It's not fair, but that's life.

Just what I was coming to say, I think Garnett could have done what Duncan has, but we can't rank players on what they probably could have done, or what they should have done, we rank them on what they did.

[NO-KG-AI]

Cevap, explain how Duncan is on a whole other level please?

OK, where to start? A previous poster mentioned how Duncan is better due to Popovich and having spend 4 years in college. Popovich was a second year Head Coach when Duncan was drafted. I firmly believe that Duncan helped out Popovich more then vice versa. I think popovich had the luxury of having Duncan on his team while he learned the coaching on the job. Duncan came into the league dominant and was ready to step into the limelight due to his years at Wake Forest. Now KG also had the option of going to any college in the country and learn the fundamentals but he chose the NBA and the paying contracts. This is the decision he thought is best in his interest and he has to live with it.

Now why Duncan is on another level....well considering the fact that he won 4 championships as the undisputed go-to-guy has something to do with it. He was the only one who could play against prime Shaq and beat him. He was the guy who knocked off the dynasty Lakers. After beating the Lakers, he was the guy who won a championship with a Parker who averaged 15 and 3 and Ginobli who averaged 9-4-3. KG needed two maximum contract players to win a championship after 26!!! playoff games...the longest in history. This team KG had was unarguably the best either of them had. And he still needed the most games ever to win a chip.

KG couldn't do anything in Minnesota except keep the team respectable or below average. He had similar teams to what Duncan had in 2002-03 and Duncan won a chip while KG was brushed off in the first round. In that final against the Nets, he posted some ridiculous averages like 25-20-5-5. He was their go to guy in the clutch, he was their defensive anchor, he was their playmakes, he was everything they needed him to be and then some. Don't believe me? Look up the box scores, i mean it's ridiculous. That final firmly sealed Duncan's place from the KG debate into the Top 10 all time one.

While one might say KG's skilset is more unique then Duncan's, I'd take the classic PF-C and build around him.

Eh, that Spurs team was much better than they are given credit for, Robinson, Bowen, Jackson, and host of others with Popovich at the helm is an elite defensive team, with Duncan anchoring, the only reason the scoring averages were so low was because only two players averaged over 30 minutes, Parker scoring 15.5 in 33 minutes, and Duncan scoring 23 in 39 minutes. This team was lacking star power outside of Duncan, but they were incredibly deep, and tough and gritty.

That team was incredibly deep, monstrous defensively, and had a lot of clutch players that took and made the big shots, lets not pretend Duncan was doing everything for them. Steven "makes love to pressure" Jackson, Manu off the bench, Malik Rose, Steve Smith, Steve Kerr, Tony Parker(with flashes) all were hitting big shots, Duncan is certainly not a go to guy in the clutch, or at the foul line. KG was on two teams as good as this team, the Boston title team, and the Minnesota WCF team, no others, so stop embellishing.

David robinson, Kevin Willis(OLD) Malik Rose, that's certainly better than any big man rotation Garnett has played with, especially defensively,

Young Parker, Ginobli, Bowen, Claxton, Steven Jackson, thats a better backcourt than any Garnett had other than Allen/Pierce and CO, and Cassell and Sprewell(who shot 41% or so).

Popovich Vs. Flip Saunders and Doc Rivers?? FLIP SAUNDERS???? The guy who played Garnett at the top of the key in his zone D? the guy who is in love with zone D at all?

Stop being so hung up on money, it's like if Dwight wins a title this year we say its because he had another max money player(Rashard Lewis) on his squad

Before the season a lot of people picked Boston for 48-52 wins, and getting beaten in the playoffs. They had no one outside of the big 3, and they had no bench, and they wouldn't mesh or play good D or any of that. Now when they win it all, they were supposed to, because they were stacked, give me a break, even you picked them to lose

You can say whatever you want about this Celtics team, but they were dominant defensively because of Garnett(and they were absolutely dominant defensively) they had the biggest turnaround in NBA history, and they wrecked the Lakers in the finals as huge underdogs.

Duncan ranks higher because of sustained winning, but if you stick him in Minnesota he wouldn't be a 4 time champion right now, but that doesn't matter in a player ranking, Duncan has 4 rings and is the proven commodity, KG showed he can win it all, but saying he could do what Duncan has done is too much what ifs and buts for my liking.

I gained a lot of respect for you for how you argued this though, I'm proud of you cevap, you are growing up right in front of my eyes

[That Nicka]

Duncan ranks higher because of sustained winning, but if you stick him in Minnesota he wouldn't have accomplished anything either

I dunno if I buy that

[NO-KG-AI]

He would have got in the playoffs and lost to far superior teams like the Lakers, and the Robinson/Garnett Spurs. :-/

Edit: Which Wolves team would Duncan have led anywhere significant, like to a finals or a title??

The only one that looks like it could contend with Duncan would be the Cassell/Spree wolves, and they would be my pick to win it all, just like they were with KG, but when Cassell and Hudson both get hurt, and Darrick Martin is playing big minutes at point, and Duncan is forced to bring the ball up because Martin can't break the press like Garnett was, I'd like to see how much better the team can do.

None of those Wolves team really had the make up to do anything, you would need an utter dominator like Prime Shaq or Wilt to take them somewhere, and none of those teams would win a title, they lacked clutch scorers, and none were significant defensively...

I think those Wolves teams might actually have been worse with Duncan, they really didn't have a lot of structure, especially defensively, Duncan's role as a defender wouldn't work so well when he has to guard the best player on the other team, his teammates don't funnel guys into him well, and there is no real structure like he is suited to, a zone D would definitely not be Duncan's strong suit, he's best at protecting the basket where guys are forced into the middle into him, much like KG, but Flip never seemed to grasp that concept.

Offensively, the Wolves never really seemed to have a plan, the players never fit, a lot of combo guards over the years, no true PG to set the table, never an explosive scorer like Manu that could shoulder the load in spurts, never any good complimentary big men(who was the best? Tom Gugliotta? Rasho? wasn't that Duncan's worst helper?)

Flip Saunders, blech, he's incredibly dense, and doesn't seem to grasp the concept of making changes, or building around players strengths.

A lot of the offensive was giving KG the ball and let him create from wherever they throw him the ball, which is something Duncan wouldn't be able to do.

Duncan definitely would function better in his strict popovich system, it's tailor made around him. The mess that was Minnesota would definitely be more suited for someone more versatile, so no, I can't really see Duncan doing anything significant in Minnesota.

[magicfan4life05]

If the OP doesn't mind, could I ask a quick question along with this?

In their prime, who was considered the better defensive player?

[tsherkin]

Duncan versus Garnett...

This comes up a lot and what it amounts to is a debate between the positions of center and power forward, because these players each typify one of those positions. Duncan came into the league and even alongside D-Rob, he played center in principle because he was the low-block guy and Robinson the guy with more intent to play out of the high post or 12 to 15 feet from the basket facing up. Both played like classic centers defensively.

But Duncan's 6'11, 260, long-limbed. He's built like a center. He takes about 2 shots a game from beyond 15 feet, usually bankers from the wing. He spends the vast majority of his time playing under the foul line on the blocks like a classic center, wheeling and dealing in and around the paint and taking advantage of low double-teams to hit cutters and perimeter shooters... very much like a low-volume Shaq, for example. He plays like a textbook definition of a center.

Defensively, he's often found playing on 4s as often as 5s, but that's because Pop puts him on the weakest threat so he can roam and anchor the interior defense, contesting anything inside 15 feet, rotating to trap, etc. He's a good man defender and switches on as necessary.

Garnett's offensive game is primarily built out of face-up scenarios and mid-range/long jumpers. He has a post game and he uses it but he also goes away from the basket to a fallaway jumper as his primary move, rather than into the paint for hook shots (Duncan's staple scoring tool). I'm not saying Garnett's soft or anything, just noting a stylistic difference, a preference for jumpers from Garnett versus Duncan's preference for pounding it inside. The difference in DrawF is noticeable, too.

Garnett's a BETTER shooter, both from the floor as a jump shooter and at the line, of course. And he's an outstanding passer. He is the iconic high post PF who can dip into the low block to mix things up. Defensively, his primary attribute is actually man defense rather than help defense, though like Duncan, he's above average or even elite in the area that isn't his "strength."

I'm inclined to choose Duncan. He draws more fouls, traditionally shoots a little bit higher percentage from the floor, is a better help defender and is capable of scoring in pretty much every way Garnett is but his approach to the game is sounder and more valuable.

I'd argue that Garnett is certainly more physically talented and displays a broader range of skills (especially as a passer) but that Duncan's style makes his impact greater (rather like Shaq not scoring outside of 12 feet at any point after leaving Orlando is still more impactful than all but a handful of players in NBA history).

[HarlemHeat37]

^^^ which is the reason I take Duncan..the main reason..

these are my 2 favorite players, and in their primes, I don't see ANY argument from anybody that says that Duncan is a whole level ahead of KG, or that KG is a level ahead of Duncan..I don't see any possible argument to say that..their numbers have been similar for most of their careers, they've been 2 of the best defenders of this generation(if not the 2 best)..KG is the more talented player IMO, but Duncan's bigger size has allowed him to do more as a traditional big man. so that's pretty much a wash IMO..probably the 2 most unselfish superstars of this generation, and probably both top 5 unselfish players of all-time..

for me, it simply comes down to style..I'll take Duncan's style over Garnett..I found myself frustrated many times during the Laker series(and at times during others), when Garnett would settle for long jumpers..then you'll see him driving on Gasol and **** on him..and then going back to shooting jumpers..I realize that's his strength as a player, but he DOES have an elite post and driving game(for a big) IMO, so he should use it more..

do I think Garnett would win 4 titles with the Spurs? no, I don't..Duncan is ideal for this system, because of his playing style..do I think Duncan would win titles with Minny? probably not..

as for being a "system player"? *sigh*, 2003..why is Duncan a system player, and not Bill Russell? or the other greats that had GREAT coaches and teammates? Duncan did do it without anybody that was even near an all-star, so that should count for something, shouldn't it?..Duncan has been the main defensive player on the team, anchoring an elite D year after year..proof is in the fact that guys like Parker and Finley have been masked this entire decade(although TP has improved his D)..the Spurs were still a top defensive team this year, despite Parker, Manu and Oberto playing average D, and Finley playing terrible D...

as much as the supporting cast from 1997-2000 and from 2005-present has helped Duncan, the "boring" team and playing in San Antonio has also affected his legacy in the media as well IMO..when you consider the fact that Duncan played more difficult opponents in the West, I don't see much of a difference between Duncan's supporting cast and Lebron's in 2007, or Iverson's in 2001..the supporting cast of those guys were well-publicized as "one-man teams", while Duncan's supporting cast didn't look much different(when you consider playing in the West)..defense wasn't really an issue, since the Spurs were ranked 3rd, Cleveland 4th, and Philly 5th..and surely Iverson and Lebron didn't anchor their D's..

if Tim played in a bigger city or if he had the hype, he would be getting a lot more love from fans and the media IMO..

[TdotWattz]

Tim Duncan is the better player, this isnt a discussion. Just because KG won this year, now people want to compare him to probably the greatest PF of all time ? Newsflash. If Duncan was on Boston he would have won this year too.
Alot of their numbers are the same, but Duncan's control over the paint isnt shown in the stats. he's the reason why their points-against is consistently at the top of the league.
Duncan is like Top 10 alltime consideration. KG is just one of the best players of this generation

[Cevap]

Offensively, the Wolves never really seemed to have a plan, the players never fit, a lot of combo guards over the years, no true PG to set the table, never an explosive scorer like Manu that could shoulder the load in spurts, never any good complimentary big men(who was the best? Tom Gugliotta? Rasho? wasn't that Duncan's worst helper?)

Flip Saunders, blech, he's incredibly dense, and doesn't seem to grasp the concept of making changes, or building around players strengths.

A lot of the offensive was giving KG the ball and let him create from wherever they throw him the ball, which is something Duncan wouldn't be able to do.

Duncan definitely would function better in his strict popovich system, it's tailor made around him. The mess that was Minnesota would definitely be more suited for someone more versatile, so no, I can't really see Duncan doing anything significant in Minnesota.

Don't you think that Minny had trouble getting players to fit their system because KG was such a unique player that they didn't know what to do with him? I mean he's 7 foot, yet runs like a Pg, has passing skills and a nice J. Had Minny had Duncan it would've been easier to build around since dominant big men in the traditional sense have been in the league for 60 years and there's a fool proof plan on how to build around them.


The reason why i believe Duncan is on a whole nother level is because you can compare him to Shaq and can successfully argue on who the better player is either way. Try to compare KG to Shaq and you'll get laughed out of RealGM. He's simply not on their level....then again not a whole lot players are...