[POLL] Kevin Garnett: Where do you rank him?

[Pg81]

15-20, similar to where I'd rank Dirk, Barkley, Petitt and Malone.

[Pg81]

As for a direct Dirk/KG comparison. It's funny how a championship can completely flip people's perspective despite the player not even being better than a previous finals run. Dirk essentially had one role..which was to shoot and score. Yeah, he did it at an extremely elite level, but that's why he's a perennial all-star in the first place. It was Kidd who ran the plays, Marion/Kidd/Tyson (DPOY) who brought the great defense. Scoring wise, Dirk didn't have the greatest offensive help, but they all stepped up in the PO's. Marion made tough buckets over LBJ, Barea was a pest off the bench, JT finally had a great PO run, Kidd was a 3 point specialist. In their last game, Dirk wasn't even playing well in the first half and Dallas was still winning. So, I wouldn't propel Dirk ahead just because he won with a "weak" cast. I see it as a combination of Miami/LBJ choking (Lebron was being passive) and Dallas's cast stepping it up..Dirk just did his thing like he always did.

Against the argument about PO success: Cuban only went into the luxury tax with the highest payrolls in the league next to the Knicks in order to win a championship. Yes, he overpaid mediocre talent, but those teams were at LEAST built to make the playoffs. So I told consider being a continuous "pretender" year after year as an argument over Minny's teams that were built to tank.

Overall, if we're building a contender, I think KG can anchor a top 5-10 offense and a top 1-5 defense while Dirk can anchor a top 1-5 offense and nothing on D. In order to be a championship team, you need either (A) a top 5 O+D (Spurs) or...(B) dominant O + top 10-ish D (Lakers) or...(C) dominant D + top 10ish O (Pistons). Some people say that offense is a lot more valuable, but that's not necessarily true. If you look at Dirk's Nash/Finley teams..they were missing defense and low post play. KG would have been the perfect fit over Dirk.

What a bunch of nonsense about Dirk showing complete lack of understanding of Dirk's role and impact on offense which outshines KGs so hard it is laughable.

Let's start with the fact that Dirk is the biggest floor spacer in history of the NBA.
Many of his team mates were only in the position to even have a shot at producing because of him stretching the defense so hard.
Terry without Dirk's Pick&Pop would never get a decent shot off.
This also leads to scrubs like Barrea having breakout games which they could not replicate once they left the Mavericks. This is worth far more than the 1-2 assists KG got more.

Let's go to your other claims:
Kidd running the plays: That's different how to KG? Ususally it was Cassel/Rondo running the plays or in other words KGs PG.
This argument is empty and meaningless. Neither Dirk nor KG did regular PG duties in any meaningful way that it would carry any weight.
The big difference here though is that Kidd was 38 and barely putting up double figures in any category, certainly not on average. Considering that he was a constant triple double threat in his prime that shows how much of a shadow of his former self he was.
Tyson must be by now the most overrated center ever. The guy put up 6/8 in his last playoff run with the Knicks and was injured just as much as usual prior to his Mavs run.
In 2011 playoffs he put up 8/9 and his main asset was his toughness. That Guy has no offensive game whatsoever.
His DPOY came the season after by the way so he was not a DPOY in 2011.
Marion was several years removed from his All-Star years and put up 12/6. Decent, but nothing to write home about and he was certainly not even close to be as good as he was with the Suns but still a good defender on SF.
Nice how you involuntarily mentioned TJ having "finally" a good playoff run. The important word here is "finally" since all JET ever was, he was a streaky shooter who could score nicely but was plain atrocious on defense and assists, averaging around 2 rebounds and 2 assists and he was supposed to be the second best player in the team.
If I compare him to the likes of Scottie Pippen, Dwayne Wade, Kobe, old Shaq, etc and people still want to tell me how "great" Terry was when he just finally played like any other goddamn 2nd option should I can only shake my head. JT is nearly as overrated as Chandler.

Then of course the good old "LBJ was choking" argument, if you can even call it that. Funny though that somehow no one wants to acknowledge that the Mavs had a good defensive scheme for him in mind and took away everything he usually wants to do in a game and basically daring him to shoot.

The argument about luxury tax is so laughably weak I considered ignoring it at first but I'll address it briefly so anyone can see how meaningless it is.
For one, how much you pay does not necessarily correlate with the quality of the players and in Cuban's case he loves to overpay overrated players. Best example would be Erick(a) Dampier.
Furthermore Caron Butler was inured for the entirety of the playoffs who was Dirk's original second option on offensive, for better comprehension the Scottie Pippen of the team.
With him if we look purely at the "money" playing the Mav's team was not any more expensive or cheaper than the majority of the teams in the NBA and again, salary does not indicate in any way or shape an accurate picture of a players real worth.

Now to the anchor argument.
Claiming that Dirk can't anchor a defense in light of the fact that the Mavs were routinely significantly worse on defense and offense without him even when they had Chandler reveals this to be a flat hyperbole.

Considering how much better of a scorer Dirk is not only in volume but in efficiency especially in the playoffs and considering that in 2011 he had the highest 4th quarter ppg since Shaq and Shaq only got there due to intensive fouling I have to question why anyone would put KGs offense anywhere near Dirk saying that KG is anywhere close to Dirk is flat out hyperbole.

Dirk has many more 30 points game than KG it's like roughly 40-10 difference.
KG has no 40 or 50 point games in the playoffs, Dirk has several.

To summarize the difference on offense:
Dirk is the better clutch scorer due to him being a huge threat from 3 and being near automatic from the FT line.
Dirk is the better volume scorer
Dirk has higher efficiency
Dirk is a massive floor spacer and can run the pick&pop and pick&roll expertly with even scrubs like Barrea.

All KG has on him is ~2 apg.

Then let's not forget that Dirk managed to drag a mediocre to decent team at best to eleven 50+ win seasons and one season was the 3rd highest in history of the NBA with a shockingly mediocre cast.
He did this also with 3 different coaches and several team rebuilds with him being the only constant.
He is one of three players to do so, the others are Bill Russel and Tim Duncan.
He is also only 1 of 4 players to average 25+/10+ in the playoffs in his prime.

That being said if I want to build a team and need offense more than defense I'd chose Dirk.
If I need defense more than offense I'd take KG because I know he is better on defense than Dirk but certainly not to the degree you would people like to believe.

To claim there is such a massive difference between the two that Dirk is basically a scrub on defense and KG a total stud on offense is misrepresenting Dirk a lot.

I also shake my head at the notion that KG would have changed anything on the early Mavs.
Nevermind the bad luck of Dirk getting injured in 2003 significantly reducing the Mavs chances to win it all and they still managed game 6 against the Spurs and the Mavs would have beaten the Nets in the finalsI am very sure of that.
But since we are at ludicrous hypothetical KG replacing Dirk in either 2006 or 2011 would have resulted in a first round exit each time.
It gets even better considering that Dirk lead his team to a championship without having an All Star in his prime next to him, unlike KG.

[Purch]

Dirk has proven he can anchor elite offenses far more often than Garnett has proven that he can anchor elite defenses. Dirk has done it under a variety of coaches, whiles Garnett didn't really anchor elite defenses until going under Thibs

[Hornet Mania]

Of all the accolades KG gets on these boards, being called an elite offensive anchor is easily the most undeserved. KG can anchor an offense out of necessity, but not at the elite level of some of the other all-time PFs.

Offense was never his calling card, and on a team with other superior offensive players (such as Paul Pierce and Ray Allen) the team strategy would fit him comfortably into the role of a high-end 2nd/3rd option. That's obviously not poor by any stretch of the imagination, but also not an elite offensive anchor either. I don't believe that KG's offense should be argued as a flaw, but it also shouldn't be exaggerated to the point of claiming he was an elite anchor on both ends of the floor. If KG is your best offensive player your team is going to struggle mightily to be top 10 on offense annually unless he's part of an ensemble effort ala the 2012-2014 Spurs.

KG's case for greatness, imo, is that he was an elite defensive anchor who also sported a versatile and effective offensive game. Just as the Kobe homers irritate posters with their gross exaggeration of his defensive impact, the KG crowd should try to avoid exaggerating their own guy as an elite anchor on offense. It doesn't really help his case.

[Exodus]

Actually I have been kind of shocked for Garnett being rated so high lately. He's been a jump shooter his whole career. Sorry, this is all that I see how of him. He was a great player, but I can't envision a jump shooter being rated over the truly great players that played in this league.

[ardee]

The more I think about it, the more I wonder how I ever thought KG was better than Dirk.

'05-'07 speaks for itself... Dirk was approximately 25 more wins than KG, and I highly doubt Dirk's supporting cast was anything more than 8-9 wins better than KG's over that period.

[Jaivl]

Actually I have been kind of shocked for Garnett being rated so high lately. He's been a jump shooter his whole career. Sorry, this is all that I see how of him. He was a great player, but I can't envision a jump shooter being rated over the truly great players that played in this league.

I guess Jordan, Bird or Kobe are "jump shooters" too.

[Purch]

Actually I have been kind of shocked for Garnett being rated so high lately. He's been a jump shooter his whole career. Sorry, this is all that I see how of him. He was a great player, but I can't envision a jump shooter being rated over the truly great players that played in this league.

I guess Jordan, Bird or Kobe are "jump shooters" too.

If you're a jumpshooting big, unless you're doing at the level of Dirk, I'd rather go with the guy playing inside.

[Jaivl]

Actually I have been kind of shocked for Garnett being rated so high lately. He's been a jump shooter his whole career. Sorry, this is all that I see how of him. He was a great player, but I can't envision a jump shooter being rated over the truly great players that played in this league.

I guess Jordan, Bird or Kobe are "jump shooters" too.

If you're a jumpshooting big, unless you're doing at the level of Dirk, I'd rather go with the guy playing inside.

Well then, good luck with the Perkins of the world, I'd take Garnett over every player ever but 10 or so.

[Purch]

I guess Jordan, Bird or Kobe are "jump shooters" too.

If you're a jumpshooting big, unless you're doing at the level of Dirk, I'd rather go with the guy playing inside.

Well then, good luck with the Perkins of the world, I'd take Garnett over every player ever but 10 or so.

Lol brillant. Of course you go to the extreme of taking a guy who can't even finish wide open layups .

And not guys like Barkley and Shaq destroying teams inside with ridicoulous efficency

[andrewww]

You don't have to make such grand exaggerations to make a point. Pau didn't shoot well in game 7. Kobe shot horribly. Pau overall clearly had a better game, kept them in it and he was the difference. Kobe's finals overall as a volume scorer on average at best efficiency doesn't scream finals MVP to me. All I said was Pau had a case. Didn't say he should've ran away with it and kobe was an insignificant factor or something...

I'm confused, how did Pau keep the Lakers in it? He only had 6 points at halftime. The Laker defense is what kept them in it. They were down by 4 going into the 4th, and then Kobe's offense started to hit.

The whole "Pau could have been 2010 Finals MVP" meme is just nonsense.

Kobe was a -4 on/off court for game 7. Gasol was a +10. They played 44 min and 42 min respectively. Is it the only thing to look it? Of course not, but it's yet another metric that helps Gasol's case.

"Los Angeles reclaimed the lead midway through and hung on with a few more big shots from Gasol, who had nine points in the period, and a remarkable clutch performance by Artest, a first-time champion as the only newcomer to last season’s roster." -- Associated Press

...A meme? Jeez.

[I see the game's on youtube. If I have a chance i'll re-watch it. 2010 wasn't that long ago, though. I remember the series well enough as far as i'm concerned.]

Only trolls and yourself insist pau shouldve been fmvp, not a single reputable poster or any true laker fans think that way. Believe what you want.

[Clyde Frazier]

I'm confused, how did Pau keep the Lakers in it? He only had 6 points at halftime. The Laker defense is what kept them in it. They were down by 4 going into the 4th, and then Kobe's offense started to hit.

The whole "Pau could have been 2010 Finals MVP" meme is just nonsense.

Kobe was a -4 on/off court for game 7. Gasol was a +10. They played 44 min and 42 min respectively. Is it the only thing to look it? Of course not, but it's yet another metric that helps Gasol's case.

"Los Angeles reclaimed the lead midway through and hung on with a few more big shots from Gasol, who had nine points in the period, and a remarkable clutch performance by Artest, a first-time champion as the only newcomer to last season’s roster." -- Associated Press

...A meme? Jeez.

[I see the game's on youtube. If I have a chance i'll re-watch it. 2010 wasn't that long ago, though. I remember the series well enough as far as i'm concerned.]

Only trolls and yourself insist pau shouldve been fmvp, not a single reputable poster or any true laker fans think that way. Believe what you want.

I'd appreciate it if you'd stop putting words in my mouth.

For the 87th time, all I said was he had a case for finals MVP.

For example, in 2011 i thought dwight got flat out robbed of the MVP. See the contrast in those 2 statements?

Not to mention your response is a completely baseless statement.

[Purch]

Gasol's game 7 was amazing, I remember watching it, and just having such a genuine appreciation for his game

[Melodabeast]

Of course he scored more efficiently. He was scoring 19 PPG against single-coverage with a usage% of 19%. Not to mention he was assisted on more than 50%+ of his shots. Kobe, meanwhile, was at 29 PPG while consistently facing double-teams and getting assisted on less than 20% of his shots. He doesn't have any argument given the fact that Bryant was far and way the best player on either team through 6 games, and Pau's game 7 was nothing special. In fact, he was quite mediocre. Dude went 6-16 with a TS% of 44%. Yeah, Kobe struggled too, but it's hilarious how people act like Pau had some great game. Overall, Kobe put better numbers while commanding far more defensive attention, and was the best player by thousands of miles through 6 games. A game 7 where both struggled doesn't change that.

You don't have to make such grand exaggerations to make a point. Pau didn't shoot well in game 7. Kobe shot horribly. Pau overall clearly had a better game, kept them in it and he was the difference. Kobe's finals overall as a volume scorer on average at best efficiency doesn't scream finals MVP to me. All I said was Pau had a case. Didn't say he should've ran away with it and kobe was an insignificant factor or something...

Gross exaggeration? Kobe through 6 games was putting up 30+/6/5/2 on 56% TS. He WAS the best player by far through 6 games. Pau DID shoot horribly in Game 7. He had a TS% of 44%. That's horrible. it's funny how people act like Pau was good in that game when he struggled mightily just like bryant did. No, Pau didn't "keep them in the game". He and Bryant both struggled through 3 quarters before turning it around in the 4th. So really..where is the case for Pau? Kobe was far better through 6 games. Pau might have been slightly better in game 7, but ultimately neither of them had a good game.

It's funny how you think Kobe putting up 29/8/4/2+/53% TS while commanding far more defensive attention and only getting assisted on less than 20% of his shots while being the best player by miles through 6 games"doesn't scream Finals MVP"...but Pau doing 19/12/4/56% TS while being single-covered and getting 50%+ of his shots assisted and being far inferior through 6 games....does? Hilarious. Pau has no case for Finals MVP.

[Jaivl]

but Pau doing 19/12/4/56% TS while being single-covered

WHAT. Good lord.

Of course Pau has a case for the FMVP. Maybe Bryant's is stronger, but the case exists.

Finals stats:

Spoiler:

G1 (win):
Pau: 23 points, 14 rebounds, 3 assists, 3 blocks, 3 TO, 63 TS%, +13, held KG to 16 points in 16 shots.
Kobe: 30 points, 7 rebounds, 6 assists, 4 TO, 57 TS%, +8

G2 (loss):
Pau: 25 points, 8 rebounds, 3 assists, 6 blocks, 1 TO, 80 TS%, -12, held KG to 6 points, dominant defense.
Kobe: 21 points, 5 rebounds, 6 assists, 4 steals, 5 TO, 49 TS%, -9

G3 (win):
Pau: 13 points, 10 rebounds, 4 assists, 2 blocks, 1 TO, 48 TS%, +0, KG went for 25 points.
Kobe: 29 points, 7 rebounds, 4 assists, 3 blocks, 45 TS%, +10, Allen 0/13.

G4 (loss):
Pau: 21 points, 6 rebounds, 3 assists, 2 blocks, 4 TO, 60 TS%, -9
Kobe: 33 points, 6 rebounds, 2 assists, 7 TO, 65 TS%, -8

G5 (loss):
Pau: 12 points, 12 rebounds, 2 steals, 1 TO, 45 TS%, -7
Kobe: 38 points, 5 rebounds, 4 assists, 4 TO, 61 TS%, -6

G6 (win):
Pau: 17 points, 13 rebounds, 9 assists, 3 blocks, 2 TO, 51 TS%, +20, Wallace + Davis shot 0/10.
Kobe: 26 points, 11 rebounds, 3 assists, 4 steals, 59 TS%, +15

G7 (win):
Pau: 19 points, 18 rebounds (9 offensive), 4 assists, 2 blocks, 1 TO, 44 TS%, +7, clutch baskets
Kobe: 23 points, 15 rebounds (4 offensive), 2 assists, 4 TO, 38 TS%, +0

[RayBan-Sematra]

The numbers Pau put up over the 4 Laker wins (listed below) were probably better then the numbers Kobe put up in the same 4 games.
I'd also say that Gasol was more important to their defense.

Kobe : 26ppg / 10rpg / 3.75apg / 2.75TOV / 2spg on 37% shooting
Gasol : 18ppg / 14rpg / 5apg / 1.5 TOV / 2.5bpg on 45% shooting

Kobe did clearly draw more defensive attention like you said but Pau still saw his fair share of double teams. They weren't treating him like a roleplayer.

Gasol also led the Laker's in APG over their 4 wins while having way less turnovers then Kobe.
He was also the clear MVP of G7 with a monster 19/19 performance.
His dominance of the offensive glass was a big key to them winning the series in general and that G7.
It kept them in games even when they "as a team" were shooting terribly.

I have no problem with Kobe winning the FMVP (he was deserving) but to say Gasol didn't have a case for the award is not something I agree with.
They were close in that series.

[Dr Pepper]

Pau Gasol needs more love. If we can waive away KG's lack of success as a no.1 guy we should play the what-if game for Pau too since he's even more skilled than KG. Imagine if he had Coach Pop or Phil Jackson from Day 1

[The Infamous1]

The more I think about it, the more I wonder how I ever thought KG was better than Dirk.

'05-'07 speaks for itself... Dirk was approximately 25 more wins than KG, and I highly doubt Dirk's supporting cast was anything more than 8-9 wins better than KG's over that period.

25 wins?

[Ballerhogger]

but Pau doing 19/12/4/56% TS while being single-covered

WHAT. Good lord.

Of course Pau has a case for the FMVP. Maybe Bryant's is stronger, but the case exists.

Finals stats:

Spoiler:

G1 (win):
Pau: 23 points, 14 rebounds, 3 assists, 3 blocks, 3 TO, 63 TS%, +13, held KG to 16 points in 16 shots.
Kobe: 30 points, 7 rebounds, 6 assists, 4 TO, 57 TS%, +8

G2 (loss):
Pau: 25 points, 8 rebounds, 3 assists, 6 blocks, 1 TO, 80 TS%, -12, held KG to 6 points, dominant defense.
Kobe: 21 points, 5 rebounds, 6 assists, 4 steals, 5 TO, 49 TS%, -9

G3 (win):
Pau: 13 points, 10 rebounds, 4 assists, 2 blocks, 1 TO, 48 TS%, +0, KG went for 25 points.
Kobe: 29 points, 7 rebounds, 4 assists, 3 blocks, 45 TS%, +10, Allen 0/13.

G4 (loss):
Pau: 21 points, 6 rebounds, 3 assists, 2 blocks, 4 TO, 60 TS%, -9
Kobe: 33 points, 6 rebounds, 2 assists, 7 TO, 65 TS%, -8

G5 (loss):
Pau: 12 points, 12 rebounds, 2 steals, 1 TO, 45 TS%, -7
Kobe: 38 points, 5 rebounds, 4 assists, 4 TO, 61 TS%, -6

G6 (win):
Pau: 17 points, 13 rebounds, 9 assists, 3 blocks, 2 TO, 51 TS%, +20, Wallace + Davis shot 0/10.
Kobe: 26 points, 11 rebounds, 3 assists, 4 steals, 59 TS%, +15

G7 (win):
Pau: 19 points, 18 rebounds (9 offensive), 4 assists, 2 blocks, 1 TO, 44 TS%, +7, clutch baskets
Kobe: 23 points, 15 rebounds (4 offensive), 2 assists, 4 TO, 38 TS%, +0

His GAME 4 and Game 3 performances really hurt his chances at winning at FMVP. So while he might of had a case , i think if you look at overall series . Kobe was the much better player.

[mtron929]

Basically, the stat guys here love Kevin Garnett based on how he compares with other all time greats. I am not persuaded by the statistical arguments at all given that I have seen enough of Kevin Garnett to know that he is not a top 10 all time player and certainly not a top 5 player as some people like to claim. Kevin Garnett possesses a lot of skills (e.g. being able to guard point guards) that are not important in practice when it comes to helping his team win. I suggest that we do not become blinded by his well-roundedness or the statistical arguments that imo can no way differentiate between Nth best player of all time and N+5th best player of all time and trust our eyes. Garnett is overrated.