ThaRegul8r wrote:ronnymac2 wrote:As for a floor? Well, Shaq/Hakeem/KAJ/Wilt are there. That's about it. I'll mention Tim Duncan, too. He's my gate-keeper to the Top-10 anyway, but I've never really included him in the Big5Centers/MJ/Magic/Bird/LeBron level because I feel his peak was inferior to those players. That said, my valuation of how important peak is to an all-time rank will perhaps shift as I learn more in this project, so I'll leave open that Duncan may surpass Russell or others in that list of 9 as well.
As for KG...it's really based on how similar their defensive games are. Garnett is really the one who plays like a modern-day Russell on defense, combining the horizontal and vertical defensive games, and while I think Russell gets underrated offensively, KG is clearly superior on offense. Trying to figure out just how good KG is on defense in relation to Russell is difficult. KG does pretty much everything right on defense except, as I said, rebound and block shots like Russell...
The second question doesn't apply to me because all I care about is how good you are as a player. The offense of Howard/Robinson doesn't impress me anyway. Ewing's offense I see clearly below KG, and if KG vs. Russell isn't clear to me and Russell is getting the edge anyway, no way does Ewing go ahead.
Thank you for your response. I see the runoff is over, but I'm more interested in discussion not the rankings, and I would like to continue this because I want to sink my teeth into this. If necessary, I can copy this into the next thread.
I've kept track of the various "next Russells," which was why I named both Ewing and Robinson, who both received the tag. Regarding the latter, in 1999, Sam Smith wrote:
With Strong Supporting Cast, Robinson Has Look Of Russell
June 15, 1999 | By Sam Smith.
What does one associate with Bill Russell?
Winning. Eleven championships in 13 years, voted the greatest player in NBA history before Magic Johnson, Larry Bird and Michael Jordan came into the league. Perhaps the greatest winner ever in pro team sports.
And what does one associate with David Robinson?
Talented, but not tough? An MVP, but never a champion.
OK, consider this: Bill Russell comes into the NBA in 1989 and joins a team without a starter beside him who ever will play in an All-Star Game again, and in the next decade plays with just one player, Sean Elliott, who even makes an All-Star team with him. And even though he is a defensive specialist, he is surrounded with poor offensive players, poor or limited-range shooters such as Avery Johnson and Vinny Del Negro, a rebounding star in Dennis Rodman who cannot make simple layups.
Now, how about this: David Robinson comes into the NBA in 1956, an angular, athletic, bright young man who is asked to do two things, rebound and block shots. He is teamed with three of the great offensive players of the era, Bob Cousy, Bill Sharman and Tom Heinsohn, who will make All-Star teams for years to come, as well as the Hall of Fame. The next season, he gets Sam Jones, another Hall of Famer, who would become one of the greatest shooters in the history of the NBA.
Who do you think would have the 11 championships?
Not Bill Russell. We would be calling David Robinson one of the great players in NBA history. Robinson was supposed to be Bill Russell with a better shot.
Does anyone remember Russell trying to shoot?
It was painful, something of a cross between Chris Dudley and Eric Montross.
Russell barely shot beyond six feet from the basket and averaged 44 percent in his career. And he was Shaq-like at the free throw line, averaging 56 percent in his career. Heck, he won a championship one season when he shot 49.2 percent on free throws.
So, get off Shaq's back!
Get off David Robinson's back!
David Robinson was supposed to be Bill Russell. He could chase down players and block the ball from behind, recover from the weak side to block the ball and rebound. He has led the league twice each in blocks and steals. But he also had to lead the league in scoring because he came to a team without an offensive star and it became progressively poorer on offense.
He had no postup game, but he had to score against the great centers of the era: Hakeem Olajuwon, Shaquille O'Neal and Patrick Ewing, all among the 50 greatest players. And then he had to keep them from scoring and lead the fast break. He was voted the leaque's best defensive player and won a scoring title.
But he wasn't a scorer.
"I'm not a Michael Jordan-type player," admits Robinson. "I don't handle the ball. I can't go out there and take 30 shots a game. That's not my style. I had to figure out what is my style. That's part of what's great about being where we are right now."
Which is four victories from Robinson's first NBA championship.
Robinson and the Spurs are overwhelming favorites over the New York Knicks in the NBA Finals starting Wednesday in San Antonio. While the Knicks stunned everyone coming out of the eighth seed in the Eastern Conference to land a spot to the Finals, the Spurs methodically mowed down Minnesota, Los Angeles and Portland with an 11-1 record, sweeping the last two series.
"Four more games and I will have vindication," says Robinson.
It perhaps is no coincidence that in his second season ever with the first all-NBA player Robinson has played with, Robinson is going to the NBA Finals as a favorite.
All it took was adding Tim Duncan, to whom Robinson ceded the principal offensive role this season. Robinson finally was able to be a defensive specialist and opportunistic offensive player.
OK, who said this, Red Auerbach or Gregg Popovich?
"Defensively, he's just a monster. Weak-side defense, off-ball defense, power forward guarding, blocking shots, rebounding. We really feed off him."
That, of course, was Spurs coach Popovich talking about Robinson after Duncan went out of Game 3 of the conference finals against Portland and Robinson dominated with a playoff-high seven blocks.
Gee, that sounds Russell-like.
"When I first came in," offers Robinson, "all I heard was, `You're great, you're great. You (media) tear a guy down and build him back up again. I'm not as good as when they're saying nice things about me. I'm not as bad as when they're saying bad things about me."
And Robinson, like Russell, like all the greats really, is only as good as the teammates that surround him and the role he is asked to play. How many titles did Jordan have with Brad Sellers and Sam Vincent? David Robinson, for the first time this year, was asked to play like Bill Russell. And the Spurs are on the way to one of the best seasons in NBA history.
Yes, David Robinson is a winner.
Though Russell has the competitive edge―as well as the big-game performances that Robinson was criticized for lacking, Robinson was someone I'd wanted to get some people's thoughts on.
Among current players, Duncan and Garnett were two I've been drawing parallels to in my notes, the former for his team-centric approach to the game, anchoring the second-greatest defensive dynasty to Russell's Celtics, and the Duncan/Popovich relationship has drawn comparisons to Russell/Auerbach. The latter, though, was a better stylistic comparison defensively, though Duncan keeps shots in bounds like Russell as a study showed.
I confess I started paying more attention to Garnett in Boston than in Minnesota, because I wanted to see how he played. Mike Fratello said of Garnett, “If he wanted to be known as a defensive specialist—à la Bill Russell or Dennis Rodman—he would have to concentrate on that part of his game. He cannot do that. He has to play center sometimes. Sometimes he plays power forward. He’s in a tough situation. Rodman always had the teammates to have the luxury to concentrate on defense. Russell too, although he was mainly a shot blocker. He could be the best defensive player in the game, but it would hurt his team.” So in Boston, with Pierce and Allen as his Havlicek and Jones, I was curious to see how he'd do.
In 2008, he won Defensive Player of the Year, and grabbed 16.8 percent of available rebounds and 25.1 percent of available defensive rebounds in his first season there, as opposed to 19.5 percent of available rebounds and a league-leading 30.8 percent of available defensive rebounds the year before. In his prime in Minnesota, Garnett won four consecutive rebounding titles from 2003-04 to 2006-07, with averages of 13.9, 13.5, 12.7, and 12.8, grabbing 20.1, 20.3, 19.6 and 19.5 percent of all available rebounds. Garnett led the league in defensive rebounds for five consecutive years from 2002-03 to 2006-07, grabbing 858, 894, 861, 752, and 792, grabbing 28.5, 30.0, 30.2, 29.7 and 30.8 percent. So Garnett was able to focus on defense, but he didn't rebound like he himself did prior to that, with
more responsibilities. In the postseason, he did up it to 17.5 percent of available rebounds and 25.3 percent of available defensive rebounds, but that's below his
own standard.
In the 2013 postseason, Garnett grabbed 23.2 percent of available rebounds and 37.9 percent of available defensive rebounds in 35.3 minutes per game in six games, averaging a playoff-leading 13.7 rebounds per game with a playoff-leading 90 defensive rating, while averaging 12.7 points a game on 56.3 percent true shooting and 3.5 assists. That's better, as Russell grabbed 23.3 percent of all available rebounds in the '64 postseason. But Russell also had shotblocking in addition to the horizontal game. In ’03-04, Garnett had a 4.0 block percentage as he blocked 2.17 shots per game to go with his 20.1 percent rebound rate and 30.0 percent defensive rebound, but that was his career high.
I once posted this:
Assessing KG: The low-impact defender
by Dennis Hans / February 7, 2005
Kevin Garnett reminds me of my Aunt Mildred’s aerobics class: low impact.
“Low impact” is a good thing for little old ladies looking to minimize the risk of injury when working out. It’s not such a good thing if you’re supposed to be an NBA superstar.
KG is a great player, but he’s not special. Perhaps coach Flip Saunders doesn’t demand enough of him, or perhaps he’s evolved into a too-cautious player to ensure that he never gets in foul trouble and thus is there for his teammates 40 minutes every game, including every second of crunch time. Maybe he lacks the killer instinct of a Bird, Magic, Jordan, Isiah, Iverson, Kobe or Shaq.
It’s also possible that he’s playing up to his potential and simply doesn’t have the raw talent to be a high-impact stud. Maybe the reason he doesn’t play like Hakeem Olajuwon, Tim Duncan and David Robinson (at both ends of the court) or Bill Russell, Ben Wallace or Dikembe Mutombo (at the defensive end) is that he can’t.
Whatever the reason or combination of reasons, KG rarely dominates. Consistency is his hallmark; most every night, he merits a grade of “very good.” He puts up numbers and plays a well-rounded game. But it seems to me that he’s not being all that he can be.
What makes the six centers or center/forwards listed above special is that all five on-court members of the opposing team are (or were) aware of the stopper’s presence. Russell revolutionized the NBA game with his defensive prowess. He would shut down his own man (unless that man was named Wilt Chamberlain) while serving as a constant nuisance to the other four foes. Russell was forever in the head of every opposing player.
That’s not the case with KG. Generally, the four guys on the other team who aren’t being guarded by KG aren’t hearing – or imagining – his footsteps. If one of those guys takes it to the hoop or shoots a runner in the lane, KG is more likely to be carving out rebounding position in the event of a miss than taking action to make the guy miss.
For his career, KG averages an anemic 1.8 blocks per game in 38 minutes. This season, in his physical prime at age 28, he’s averaging a truly pathetic 1.38 blocks in 39 minutes. Through games of Feb. 6, he’s the 30th best shot blocker in the league right behind a converted small forward (Shawn Marion), two guys who play about half as many minutes as KG (Dan Gadzuric and Chris Andersen) and one guy who puts in one-third the minutes (Steven Hunter). Tim Duncan is blocking twice as many shots as KG despite playing just 35 minutes per game. Andrei Kirilenko blocks a shot every 8 minutes; KG blocks one every 28 minutes. Even Yao Ming swats more shots than KG.
David Robinson in his 30-and-younger seasons averaged anywhere between a low of 3.2 blocks and a high of 4.5. Hakeem Olajuwon’s prime seasons featured 3 or 4 blocks per night. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar blocked 4 a game in the season that he turned 32. Russell, with the same frame as KG but listed an inch shorter, played before blocks became an official NBA stat. Given the fear he instilled, he likely averaged at least 4 blocks for his career.
Ben Wallace, who might not even be the 6-9 he’s officially listed as, blocked 3.5 and 3.2 shots per night in his two Defensive Player of the Year seasons. Also, Ben usually accumulates at least as many steals as KG. Hakeem averaged many more steals in his prime seasons than either Ben or KG.
There’s a reason why smart people rarely think of KG as a candidate for Defensive Player of the Year: They sense the absence of his defensive “presence.”
Now here’s what I’m not sure about: Is KG physically incapable of being a defensive monster, a guy who causes nightmares for players because he’s seemingly everywhere, so that even if he doesn’t get your shot you nevertheless think he will and so you shoot too soon or overdo the arc?
Considering that KG is 6-11 with very long arms, great coordination and excellent timing, and considering that he’s a good jumper who is quick off his feet and has long, effortless strides that allow him to cover ground in a hurry, he would seem to have the ingredients to be a standout swatter. He should be able to average 3 blocks a game and still be a good man-on-man defender and passing-lane hawk, a la Russell, Big Ben and Hakeem.
Two related attributes of great shot blockers are (1) they don’t have to gather before jumping, and (2) they get off the floor incredibly quickly. KG’s teammate Eddie Griffin barely gets off the ground, but the combination of his length, timing and lightning-quick but low-altitude jumps make him a terrific swatter (1.7 in only 22 minutes a night, which would be 3.0 a night if he played KG’s minutes and maintained his pace). Although KG appears to me to get off the floor in non-gathering situations pretty quickly, it’s possible he lacks the blinding reflex-jumping quickness of a Kirilenko, Russell or young Mutombo.
Thus, it’s possible KG’s swat potential is, say, 2.4 per game rather than 4.2, and if he tried to lead the league he’d hurt his team by continually taking himself out of rebounding position while blocking or changing relatively few shots. But it’s hard for me to believe that he’s helping the Wolves as much as he can at 1.4 per game.
There’s only one way to find out if KG’s anemic swatting numbers are primarily the product of physical limitations or KG’s lack of a swatter’s mentality and the failure of Flip Saunders to help him develop one: Saunders must challenge KG to be a defender in the style of Russell, Big Ben, Mutombo and Hakeem.
In this two-month-long experiment, KG will assume the identity of “The Wolfman” and go after enough shots that opposing players become keenly aware of his presence. After two months, KG and the Wolves braintrust can assess the results and adjust his swatting mindset to whatever is best for the Wolves. If he’s a dismal failure as Wolfman, he’ll have to dial back his approach, though maybe not all the way back to what we’ve seen so far this season. If Wolfman is a howling success, then there’s nothing to change.
More than likely, he’ll probably have to tone things down at least a tad, reserving 100-percent Wolfman for full moons. But the experiment is an absolute necessity to establish how much of a defensive force KG is capable of being. Because right now, the answer is a disappointing “Not much.”
And your response was:
ronnymac2 wrote:I need to respectfully disagree with this article. Simply looking at KG’s blocked shot averages ignores context. He isn’t a traditional interior anchor, but a hybrid interior-perimeter anchor. His strength is disrupting connecting parts of an offense, of altering offensive plays and covering for his teammates. In this last regard, he is very Russell-like imo, right down to that effect not showing up in the stat sheet.
Now, Russell himself said:
Bill Russell wrote:Good defense sometimes does not result in a turnover or blocked shot or steal or anything. Good defense will get the offensive team out of a rhythm and one of the keys to shooting is rhythm. That is why you see guys with open shots not make them. Well, good defense makes you shoot before you want to shoot or after you want to shoot, not when you want to shoot. Defense can sometimes be deceptive and you’ll say, well, they’re not shooting well and they had open shots. Well those shots aren’t open. A guy is standing there by himself, but he has to shoot the ball before the defense gets there or fake and shoot after he leaves. So he isn’t shooting when he wants to shoot and that will throw your rhythm off. What looks like a good shot is not really a good shot.
Though, vis-a-vis Russell, Russell
does had that block shot element, adding an intimidation factor, as Russell himself said it's more the threat of the block than the block itself. TMACFORMVP once said:
One aspect of Russell's game that I just marvel at is his speed. We talk about the torrid pace they played at in the 60's to downgrade their stats (and rightfully so), but we fail to appreciate how well conditioned these athletes must have been to play large minutes at such a fast pace, especially Russell. This guy was all over the place, quick enough to come out on the pick and roll, and then recover fast enough to block the shot. He ran the fast break, fought for every rebound, competed on every possession, and played over 40 MPG nearly every season of his career.
Someone asked, what's the difference between Garnett and Russell, and I'd point to their defense. I'm probably alone in this mind-set, but I think Garnett has been slightly overrated defensively; not neccessarily his impact with Boston, but his years in Minnesota. Don't get me wrong, Garnett is an all time great defender, and one of the best the league has seen, but recently, I've started to notice that people are equating Garnett with automatically anchoring a top 5 sort defense, and on the same caliber with guys like Hakeem, Russell, or D-Rob. I think what made them all such terrifying defenders was because of their same ability to rotate, much like Garnett, but also be the best shot blocking threats in the league, something Garnett really hasn't/wasn't been for his career.
Granted so much goes into team defense, it's unfair to completely judge Garnett's Minnesota teams defensively (when afterall, his supporting cast sucked), but his Minnesota teams were generally average defensively, barring his one year in 03-04. And again, I understand shot blocking isn't a one and all metric for defense, but those three players had similar capability in rotating and defending the pick and roll that KG did, but they were also far more intimidating factors in the paint. I don't think it's a coincidence that the Timberwolves best defensive season came when KG was most intimidating at the rim. I understand he hasn't been any better a shot blocker with Boston, so how do we explain that, but there are more factors as mentioned with coaching, and better personnel.
I just think it's slightly overrating Garnett, when I've seen many people claim Garnett has anchored elite defenses ever since he came into the league and became an established player (and that's the part I'm saying is overrated, because otherwise, no one has had real more defensive impact in the league when Garnett finally got some personnel and coaching, the only other with an argument being Howard.
*First column is team DTRG, then opponents points, and finally opponent FG%.
Hakeem Olajuwon
Code: Select all
84-85: 4th - (10th in points, 6th in FG%)
85-86: 14th - (13th in points, 13th in FG%)
86-87: 3rd - (3rd in points, 6th in FG%)
87-88: 4rd - (13th in points, 2nd in FG%)
88-89: 4th - (9th in points, 7th in FG%)
89-90: 1st - (9th in points, 5th in FG%)
90-91: 2nd (6th in points, 5th in FG%)
91-92: 10th - (11th in points, 10th in FG%)
92-93: 3rd - (3rd in points, 3rd in FG%)
93-94: 2nd - (5th in points, 3rd in FG%)
94-95: 12th - (14th in points, 2nd in FG%)
95-96: 14th - (17th in points, 14th in FG%)
Total: 6.08 (9.5 in points, 6.3 in FG%)
David Robinson
Code: Select all
89-90: 3rd (5th in points, 3rd in FG%)
90-91: 1st - (5th in points, 1st in FG%)
91-92: 1st - (3rd in points, 1st in FG%)
92-93: 10th - (8th in points, 4th in FG%)
93-94: 9th - (2nd in points, 4th in FG%)
94-95: 5th - (12th in points, 7th in FG%)
95-96: 3rd - (10th in points, 3rd in FG%)
Total: 4.57 (6.4 in points, 3.8 in FG%)
Obviously Robinson has had better coaching, but it's interesting to note that they were a slightly worse defensive team relative to the year with Rodman, opposed to the previous seasons without. Nonetheless, I'd say both had better supporting casts than Garnett, but both Robinson and Hakeem faced fluctuations with their roster as well, and no one else of real significance of All-NBA defensive caliber either, yet for the most part, they anchored top 10 - near top 5 defenses every year of their career.
Garnett on the other hand, in his Minnesota years:
Kevin Garnett
Code: Select all
98-99: 11th (16th in points, 15th in FG%)
99-00: 12th (11th in points, 9th in FG%)
00-01: 16th (14th in points, 22nd in FG%)
01-02: 15th (16th in points, 13th in FG%)
02-03: 16th (18th in points, 10th in FG%)
03-04: 6th (7th in points, 4th in FG%)
04-05: 15th (9th in points, 7th in FG%)
05-06: 10th (8th in points, 9th in FG%)
06-07: 21st (19th in points, 15th in FG%)
Total: 13.5 (13.1 in points, 11.5 in FG%)
Again, I feel I have to clearly explain what I'm trying to say; in no way am I saying that Garnett isn't an elite defender, but I'm not completely sold he's as good an anchor as guys like Hakeem, or Robinson, and especially Russell. Garnett's strengths defensively lie within his impeccable rotation and pick and roll defense, arguably in that regard having a case for top three all-time. He's a terrific vocal leader on the court, and his passion inspires teammates to play to the best of their ability. BUT, I think those I've mentioned, provide the same impeccable rotations, while being a double threat with all time great shot blocking, something Garnett lacks compared to his peers. And Russell especially even exceeds the leadership Garnett displays on the court.
Garnett does everything exceptional, but Russell did all those same things at the absolute best one could possibly do it - including shot blocking, where the big difference lies.
Garnett is an all time great defender, and the prototypical player at the PF position, along with Duncan, BUT I still think he's not in the same tier as Russell, or the other aforementioned centers defensively. Similar versatility on pick and rolls and rotations, but Russell possesses even greater leadership (again, player coach for two seasons), with far greater intimidation.
So, in comparison with Russell, Russell has the horizontal game plus shotblocking that Garnett never did, and rebounded at a level that Garnett didn't do in Boston where he could concentrate on defense. This is something you mention as well. So Garnett's a better two-way player, but when he was in a situation where he could play like Russell, he didn't rebound like him or block shots like him. So if Garnett is the floor, it's something to ponder. Additionally―rightly or wrongly―Garnett's "clutchness" was questioned during the title run, while Russell was regarded as clutch when he played, and Russell was actually a name I saw brought up against Garnett in a couple of articles as someone who possessed the "clutchness" Garnett didn't.
Russell was the same way, but again, he also was the superior defensive rebounder and traditional rim protector. 
