The Kevin Garnett thread: the most fascinating player on RGM

[richboy]

The Spurs would not have 4 championships because Duncan came into the league All NBA 1st team. KG was not. I wish people would stop forgetting KG came in and was playing SF because he was a beanpole and his impact wasn't anywhere near Duncan's.......

What about the 00 playoffs, with KG and Robinson healthy for the playoffs instead of the Spurs losing Duncan, with Kobe still pretty green and not close to what he would later become?

What about the 04-06 playoffs, when Duncan was injured throughout those years? In 06, the Spurs probably don't do anything with KG instead of Duncan, since Duncan played like a monster anyway, but in 04 and 05, when Duncan was pretty unimpressive relative to his own standards (especially in 04, that was a straight up bad playoff run for him)?

What about the fact that KG aged better than Duncan? How would the Spurs have done in 08, 11, and 12 with KG instead of Duncan, when KG was clearly better than Duncan? Duncan was better than KG in 09 and 10, but he wasn't an MVP-level player anymore and the Spurs weren't contenders anymore either, so it wouldn't have mattered either way.

KG aged better than Duncan? KG on the verge of retirement and Duncan had a MVP candidate season? Duncan has never had a PER under 22. KG has had 8 seasons with a PER under 22. 22 would suggest Duncan has never played at at least a strong all-star level.

Also not forget Duncan played 4 years of college. Imagine another 4 years in Duncan career. He would have been an allstar every year after his sophomore year.

[richboy]

If the idea is that if you give KG a 18 point scorer your going to have a championship level offense. The reality is he had 18 point per game scorers in the past and wasn't winning championships. Not only that but was not a great offensive team at any point.

The 2004 Minnesota Timberwolves are one of the most overrated teams on Realgm. How many times do they bring that team up. Lets not forget that they barely had the best record in the West. That the Spurs had lost Duncan for a stretch. The Kings had Webber for just over 20 games. In the playoffs he was pretty much playing on one leg. The Lakers were in the middle of the Kobe/Shaq issue. Also with both missing part of the year. Same with Karl Malone at the time.

It took an act of god to get KG that deep in the West. If not for Duncan injury he probably the MVP of the league again that year. Instead they finished 1 game behind Minnesota which gave everyone the go ahead to make KG the MVP. He plays all year they are a 60 plus win team and at the top of the league standings.

Getting Spree, Cassell, and KG weren't that good of a squad either. The pretending that KG was a few decent players away from dominating the league is just crazy. He has been on one team that dominated the regular season in the weak East that scraped by to win the title instead of going out early. For KG to have similar success to Duncan he would have needed a top tier player.

What is a championship level offense anyway? Detroit in 04 had an offense ranked 18th in the league. In 2010, Boston made the finals with a 15th ranked offense etc. There is no such thing as a championship level offense, you win championship with your overall production on the court.

The only times he has had an 18 ppg scorer on his team in his prime was in 2002 (Szczerbiak), 2004 (Cassell), 2006 (Ricky Davis, lol..) and in 2008 (Pierce). The first time, he won 50 games and got bounced in the first round. The second time he went to the WCF. Third time was Ricky Davis and the fourth time he won a championship. How is this an argument against him? Except for the year with Ricky Davis, which I won't even argue about why it's stupid to think that he should be a real second option, Garnett has had great success with 18 ppg second options.

And yes, I agree that the 04 Minny team is overrated but not the way you find them overrated. The cast is overrated but what they managed to produce isn't. Sure, it's great that you list all other teams issues without addressing that Minnesota missed Szczerbiak for 2/3s of the season, Hudson for the season and Cassell was playing on one leg during the playoffs when he wasn't missing games. As crazy as it sounds, Wolves might've even went to the finals if they still had Hudson healthy for the playoffs because it would've allowed Garnett to still play PF and bump Derrick Martin to the bench. If Cassell was fully healthy, there's no doubt in my mind that they make the finals that year.

And no, Duncan wasn't winning the MVP in 04 even if he had played in all games. Garnett was flat out better that year.

Please that argument doesn't fly. Every guy uses it to try to make a case for some player or another that not really good enough to carry a team. In essence if you give them an alltime great defense they can win. Yes if you can guarantee a all-time great defense you can win with Rip Hamilton as your best offensive player. 1 year. Which you haven't seen anything with any consistency with teams that just rely on great defense.

I didn't mention those players because apparently those players aren't even good players by the Garnett he didn't get real help until Cassell and Spree mantra. Hudson is apparently one of the worst defensive players in league history by the numbers.

Honestly your comparing Tim Duncan, Chris Webber, Shaq and Kobe missing games to Wally Z and Troy Hudson. OK you have those two. Those other teams get there guys for the entire year. Minnesota the 4th best team in the West.

[G35]

The Spurs would not have 4 championships because Duncan came into the league All NBA 1st team. KG was not. I wish people would stop forgetting KG came in and was playing SF because he was a beanpole and his impact wasn't anywhere near Duncan's.......

What about the 00 playoffs, with KG and Robinson healthy for the playoffs instead of the Spurs losing Duncan, with Kobe still pretty green and not close to what he would later become?

What about the 04-06 playoffs, when Duncan was injured throughout those years? In 06, the Spurs probably don't do anything with KG instead of Duncan, since Duncan played like a monster anyway, but in 04 and 05, when Duncan was pretty unimpressive relative to his own standards (especially in 04, that was a straight up bad playoff run for him)?

What about the fact that KG aged better than Duncan? How would the Spurs have done in 08, 11, and 12 with KG instead of Duncan, when KG was clearly better than Duncan? Duncan was better than KG in 09 and 10, but he wasn't an MVP-level player anymore and the Spurs weren't contenders anymore either, so it wouldn't have mattered either way.

What about KG hurt in 2009 and why the Celtics didn't repeat like people think they would have.

How much better would the Wolves have been with a full time starter instead of KG coming off the bench.

This is such an unfair way (and alternate universe thinking) to compare the two since Duncan has been much more successful in the playoff's.

Playoff runs KG had a PER under 20
1997
1998
2010
2011
2013

Playoff runs KG had a PER over 25
2002
2003
2004

Playoff runs Duncan had a PER under 20

2010
2011

Playoff runs Duncan had a PER over 25
1999
2001
2002 (over 30)
2003
2004
2006 (over 30)
2007
2009

I don't understand your logic at the end of your post saying that because Duncan wasn't an MVP candidate the Spurs weren't contenders that it doesn't matter that Duncan was the better player. This goes against that whole "It's about the player impacts the game, not how the team performs argument". That's more of that convenient style of arguing when it fits my argument.....

[Doctor MJ]

I'm still not clear on what any of that has to do with Kevin Garnett as a basketball player. You keep talking about KG's teams -- what does that have to do with KG?

He was a big reason why his teams underperformed in the playoffs. His numbers consistently fell off and the Wolves offense fell as a result. His O rating in his peak 02-04 years was something like 102. That is not good enough for your star player. Its hard for a team to overcome their star player shooting with Allen Iverson efficiency as the Knicks this year learned too. Going from 55 to 51 TS% is a huge downgrade.

But his teams didn't underperform in the playoffs. The two times they got "upset", it was against Laker teams absolutely everyone agreed were more talented.

I think in the end what it all comes down to is that Garnett's teams didn't make as much noise in Minny as we've come to expect from superstar-led teams, so everything that can possibly pointed out as a possible negative gets trotted out as proof of an achilles heel.

I'm not opposed to people saying that Garnett in the playoffs didn't translate as well as, say, Tim Duncan, but there really isn't any cause to blame some sort of basketball karma on Garnett here especially given that we've since seen him win and "upset" teams along the way.

[FJS]

KG was on 50 win teams, getting beat by better and much more talented teams. Not like he was losing to lesser teams (Like Malone and Stockton).

If you are so great, your teams should be better. See Lebron and Cavs, for example.
KG had good pgs to play with and some interesting players to play with like Marbury, Brandon, Porter, Gugliotta (when he was a 20 ppg player), Rider (20 ppg season), Mitchell, Peeler, Smith, Sealy, Billups, Booby Jackson, Wally, Strickland....

He never was able to make his team better than first round loss. Then he got Cassell and Sprewell and his streak is for one season....

I repeat, great players with less has done more. Iverson and Lebron comes to mind.

In fact he is near to Tmac (elite offense with playmaker ability, great rebouding in his peak) than the greatness of Duncan.

He has been only 4 times in the all nba 1st team, and in those years he was beat by and aging Malone, Duncan, Webber, Hill, T-Mac, Dirk, Lebron, Marion, Brand, Anthony, Bosh from 98-99 to 07-08 (his peak)

[NO-KG-AI]

KG has never played with anyone as good as Stockton or Malone, in your eyes, right?

[boateng]

He took too many jump shots and ate all the money.
People will say the wolves put awful teams around him but how can you put great ones when your star player is earning $30m a season? Some of the contracts that he was on was outrageous. That said still an all time great.

[WhateverBro]

He took too many jump shots and ate all the money.
People will say the wolves put awful teams around him but how can you put great ones when your star player is earning $30m a season? Some of the contracts that he was on was outrageous. That said still an all time great.

Garnett has never gotten 30 million a season. He maxed out at 28 mill and took a significant paycut the year after when he settled to start the contract at 16 mill.

On the other hand, Lakers somehow has managed to put Dwight, Gasol, MWP and Nash around Kobe making 30 million next year. Jordan also had Rodman, Pippen, Kukoc, Ron Harper etc around him while making 30 mill.

Timberwolves failed to put a team around Garnett several times, despite him taking paycuts. McHale was just a poor GM, there's nothing more to it.

[boateng]

He took too many jump shots and ate all the money.
People will say the wolves put awful teams around him but how can you put great ones when your star player is earning $30m a season? Some of the contracts that he was on was outrageous. That said still an all time great.

Garnett has never gotten 30 million a season. He maxed out at 28 mill and took a significant paycut the year after when he settled to start the contract at 16 mill.

On the other hand, Lakers somehow has managed to put Dwight, Gasol, MWP and Nash around Kobe making 30 million next year. Jordan also had Rodman, Pippen, Kukoc, Ron Harper etc around him while making 30 mill.

Timberwolves failed to put a team around Garnett several times, despite him taking paycuts. McHale was just a poor GM, there's nothing more to it.

You can't be serious right?
Of course lakers can afford all those players on high contracts because they are the lakers and in the largest market after New York.
The wolves are one of the smallest market teams in the league and can't afford multiple star players on huge salaries.
Also everybody wants to play for the lakers. Who wants to play for the wolves? You can't force players to sign for you.

[WhateverBro]

You can't be serious right?
Of course lakers can afford all those players on high contracts because they are the lakers and in the largest market after New York.
The wolves are one of the smallest market teams in the league and can't afford multiple star players on huge salaries.
Also everybody wants to play for the lakers. Who wants to play for the wolves? You can't force players to sign for you.

So because Wolves is a smaller market team; Garnett should settle for less money? That makes perfect sense...

McHale messed up by trading Ray Allen for Marbury, drafting poorly, being stripped of multiple first round picks by Stern and not extending Cassell. And that's just the big, most noticible mistakes. Ironically, paying Garnett enough money to stay was one of his better moves, actually..

[FJS]

KG has never played with anyone as good as Stockton or Malone, in your eyes, right?

This is your point?
I don't remind this was a Stockton/Malone comparison with KG.

[NO-KG-AI]

You're the one that wants to make it about team accomplishments. I'll let you backpedal though.

[microfib4thewin]

He took too many jump shots and ate all the money.
People will say the wolves put awful teams around him but how can you put great ones when your star player is earning $30m a season? Some of the contracts that he was on was outrageous. That said still an all time great.

This is one of the worse arguments ever. If you are comparing KG to Duncan or Dirk who both took paycuts when they could have earned substantially more I can see this as a valid point, but in general superstars will not settle for lower pay to give the team more breathing room. The fact that an organization is able to build a winning team with a maxed out star player speaks more about the organization than the player himself. KG could have been paid 10 mil a year and the Wolves still wouldn't be able to field a competent team. Just look at Nash, he gets paid 10 mil a year and has superstar impact, yet the Suns keep on making budget-cutting moves instead of moves that can help improve the team. You can talk about how Nash is not a championship caliber player because he's all offense and no defense, but what you cannot deny is how **** of a job the Suns FO have done during Nash's prime.

[FJS]

You're the one that wants to make it about team accomplishments. I'll let you backpedal though.

Team accomplishments are important, no doubt.
There's a lot of players with incredible peaks who aren't recogniced higher due to lack of wins.

K. Malone, Barkley, Ewing, Robinson, Baylor are ranked lower than they should due to lack of rings. And I think KG it's not better than all of them. I would take Malone and Robinson over KG. I'm leaning towards to take Chuck and Ewing too over Garnett. Baylor it's difficult for me, as I did not watch him play.

[therealbig3]

Baylor it's difficult for me, as I did not watch him play.

Doesn't stop half the people here from commenting about KG when they clearly haven't seen him play either...

[G35]

He took too many jump shots and ate all the money.
People will say the wolves put awful teams around him but how can you put great ones when your star player is earning $30m a season? Some of the contracts that he was on was outrageous. That said still an all time great.

This is one of the worse arguments ever. If you are comparing KG to Duncan or Dirk who both took paycuts when they could have earned substantially more I can see this as a valid point, but in general superstars will not settle for lower pay to give the team more breathing room. The fact that an organization is able to build a winning team with a maxed out star player speaks more about the organization than the player himself. KG could have been paid 10 mil a year and the Wolves still wouldn't be able to field a competent team. Just look at Nash, he gets paid 10 mil a year and has superstar impact, yet the Suns keep on making budget-cutting moves instead of moves that can help improve the team. You can talk about how Nash is not a championship caliber player because he's all offense and no defense, but what you cannot deny is how **** of a job the Suns FO have done during Nash's prime.

Nash was getting $10 mill a year because he was a fringe all star when he decided to start winning MVP's. He JOINED Amare/Marion/Joe Johnson. He was the piece added if you remember the story.

How was Memphis able to build their team? Indiana? Golden State? The Sacramento Kings of Bibby/Vlade/Webber/Christie/Bobby Jackson.

You know it's getting tiresome how so and so's favorite player doesn't win a title or can't get anywhere and it's all the front office's fault. Malone/Stockton never had that third piece EVERY title team needs to give it a lift in it's offense. But it's always Stockton's fault for not taking over. Why isn't it ever KG's fault for not stepping up?

Every front office messes up. The Celtics went through seven of eight years of not even making the playoff's. The Lakers have messed up this year gambling on a 37 year old Nash re-creating the magic he had with D'Antoni. They are still gambling on Dwight and I think they should sign and trade his arse.

Washington
Charlotte
New Orleans
Milwaukee
Golden State
Toronto
Philadelphia

All on the perpetual treadmill of mediocrity.

Atlanta
Brooklyn
NY Knicks
Denver

Teams that never put it all together. Annual teases.

Orlando
Sacramento
Portland
Utah
Houston
Phoenix

Teams that reach the top and then fall back to the pack.

Why fans think that it's so easy to build a championship team. That you just snap your fingers and voila championship roster. This part of the equation is more luck and timing than anything else. Blaming the front office is like blaming your parents for not making you into a 6'8, 260 lb, that can run a 4.4 forty. Some things is on your for making your own future and it's not like Minnesota didn't compensate him. I believe KG has made the most money of any one single player in NBA history......

[Texas Chuck]

Baylor it's difficult for me, as I did not watch him play.

Doesn't stop half the people here from commenting about KG when they clearly haven't seen him play either...

while this is obviously intended as a cheap shot at people who disagree that KG is a GOAT, there is some truth to this. I worked in Minneapolis for 2 years during the early 00s so I watched quite a few Wolves games, but other than that they were rarely relevant as a team which does mean most on here have seen less of him in his prime than other superstars who made regular deep PS runs and who played more national TV games.

And so if people's memories of him in his prime are mostly from the PS then its understandable perhaps why people who include "the eye test" and their view of him at the time in their evaluation would cross swords with the guys who take a more stats-intensive approach. I think people tend to underrate players whose contributions include the level of nuance as KG's when they dont get to see him in volume. Kidd is another player who the more you watch the more you appreciate all the subtle little things he does that contribute to wins. Noah, another.

[NO-KG-AI]

People are making a mistake in assuming that even if KG played for free, that the Wolves would have signed anything of significance in that time.

It's really a non argument anyway, people start arguing that because their other arguments got shredded.

[G35]

People are making a mistake in assuming that even if KG reduced his salary, that the Wolves would not have signed anything of significance in that time.

It's really a non argument anyway, people start arguing that because their other arguments got shredded.

Corrected....

[The Infamous1]

Lol at not seeing KG play. Dude was one of the biggest stars in the league his entire prime, was mvp of the league team was in the playoffs the majority of his career. Everyone saw KG play, some people just don't put him on the pedastal the Garnett fanatics do.