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

[G35]

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.

They have taken this one stat and applied it to everything. But what about everything else?

PER (career)

Garnett (23rd) after Barkley, Duncan, Karl Malone, Erving, and Kobe

TS% (career)

Garnett (193rd) after Barkley (8th), KAJ (25th), Shaq (38th), DRob (44th), Dirk (46th), KMalone (58th), Bird (97th), Oscar (98th), Erving (121st), Kobe (139th), Hakeem (153rd), Ewing (155th), Duncan (169th)

TREB% (career)

Garnett (43rd) after Moses (4th), Mutumbo (8th), Duncan (13th), Barkley (16th), Shaq (23rd), DRob (32nd), Hakeem (33rd)

USG (career)

Garnett (80th) after Wade (2nd), Kobe (4th), Shaq (10th), KMalone (11th), Ewing (18th), Duncan (21st), Pierce (24th), Erving (29th), Hakeem (31st), Dirk (32nd), Bird (41st), Drob (46th), Moses (69th)

WS (career)

Garnett (9th) after KAJ (1st), Karl (3rd), Duncan (6th), Oscar (8th), and before Dirk (10th), Shaq (11th), Erving (12th), Moses (13th), Drob (14th), Barkley (15th), Kobe (17th), Lebron (18th), Russell (19th), Hakeem (20th), Magic (23rd), and Bird (25th)

WS per 48 (career)

Garnett (30th) after Drob (2nd), Lebron (5th), KAJ (7th), Magic (8th), Barkley (9th), West (10th), Duncan (12th), Dirk (15th), Shaq (16th), Oscar (17th), KMalone (18th), Bird (20th), Russell (24th), Erving (25th), and Kobe (34th)


Looking at the efficiency and USG stats it seems these are not weighted as heavily with Garnett and some posters are focused on his all around production aka RAPM as the final determiner......

[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.

25 wins?

His teams had 25 wins more than KG. My bad.

[colts18]

'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.

How did KG go from 35 wins less than KG to 15 wins more in 1 season? Did he get that much better in 1 offseason?


lol@ Dirk's cast being only 8-9 wins better than KG's in 2007. Have you looked at the 07 Wolves roster?

Mike James
Ricky Davis
Hassell
KG
Mark Blount

That's a horrible lineup. The Twolves did not have 1 other above average player on the roster.

We saw what happened to the TWolves when KG was out a few games:

0-6 record
-19.2 MOV

In the 1007 minutes that KG missed that season, the TWolves were -15.3 team. That is even worse than what the 12 Bobcats did.

[G35]

'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.

How did KG go from 35 wins less than KG to 15 wins more in 1 season? Did he get that much better in 1 offseason?


lol@ Dirk's cast being only 8-9 wins better than KG's in 2007. Have you looked at the 07 Wolves roster?

Mike James
Ricky Davis
Hassell
KG
Mark Blount

That's a horrible lineup. The Twolves did not have 1 other above average player on the roster.

We saw what happened to the TWolves when KG was out a few games:

0-6 record
-19.2 MOV

In the 1007 minutes that KG missed that season, the TWolves were -15.3 team. That is even worse than what the 12 Bobcats did.

And?

Mike James had a very good year in 2006 and then went to Minnesota and his production dropped. Mark Blount played better when he was in Boston before going to Minnesota. Ricky Davis also played better when he was Boston and then he went to Minnesota and became terrible. Why is it no one excelled with KG?

Look at the Spurs in 1993/94 without David Robinson, Vinny Del Negro had the highest PER at 15.3 and those Spurs won 55 games. Why doesn't anyone go to bat for DRob and whine for him? Just keep the whining fair for all players......

[colts18]

And?

Mike James had a very good year in 2006 and then went to Minnesota and his production dropped. Mark Blount played better when he was in Boston before going to Minnesota. Ricky Davis also played better when he was Boston and then he went to Minnesota and became terrible. Why is it no one excelled with KG?

Look at the Spurs in 1993/94 without David Robinson, Vinny Del Negro had the highest PER at 15.3 and those Spurs won 55 games. Why doesn't anyone go to bat for DRob and whine for him? Just keep the whining fair for all players......

Mike James was never a good player to begin with. He had 1 fluke season that he never matched. After KG left, he never put up better than a 11.8 PER

Ricky Davis is another player who wasn't good. Ricky Davis was always terrible. Davis PER actually increased when he left Boston to go to Minnesota. After KG left, Davis only played 3 more NBA seasons and had a 10.7 PER

Blount. Another scrub. In 2007, he actually had his 2nd best career PER. After 2007, he had just 2 more NBA seasons left at 11.1 PER.

Trenton Hassell's career high PER was 10.4. After KG left he had a 6.2 PER for 3 seasons.

Not one of those players put up a 15 PER season after 2007.

[Purch]

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.

They have taken this one stat and applied it to everything. But what about everything else?

PER (career)

Garnett (23rd) after Barkley, Duncan, Karl Malone, Erving, and Kobe

TS% (career)

Garnett (193rd) after Barkley (8th), KAJ (25th), Shaq (38th), DRob (44th), Dirk (46th), KMalone (58th), Bird (97th), Oscar (98th), Erving (121st), Kobe (139th), Hakeem (153rd), Ewing (155th), Duncan (169th)

TREB% (career)

Garnett (43rd) after Moses (4th), Mutumbo (8th), Duncan (13th), Barkley (16th), Shaq (23rd), DRob (32nd), Hakeem (33rd)

USG (career)

Garnett (80th) after Wade (2nd), Kobe (4th), Shaq (10th), KMalone (11th), Ewing (18th), Duncan (21st), Pierce (24th), Erving (29th), Hakeem (31st), Dirk (32nd), Bird (41st), Drob (46th), Moses (69th)

WS (career)

Garnett (9th) after KAJ (1st), Karl (3rd), Duncan (6th), Oscar (8th), and before Dirk (10th), Shaq (11th), Erving (12th), Moses (13th), Drob (14th), Barkley (15th), Kobe (17th), Lebron (18th), Russell (19th), Hakeem (20th), Magic (23rd), and Bird (25th)

WS per 48 (career)

Garnett (30th) after Drob (2nd), Lebron (5th), KAJ (7th), Magic (8th), Barkley (9th), West (10th), Duncan (12th), Dirk (15th), Shaq (16th), Oscar (17th), KMalone (18th), Bird (20th), Russell (24th), Erving (25th), and Kobe (34th)


Looking at the efficiency and USG stats it seems these are not weighted as heavily with Garnett and some posters are focused on his all around production aka RAPM as the final determiner......

From my history of lurking on this board, Realgmers always have their "stat of the year" which they put an extreme amount of value in. It's like a fad that eventually fades. A couple years ago I saw the same thing with PER

[G35]

And?

Mike James had a very good year in 2006 and then went to Minnesota and his production dropped. Mark Blount played better when he was in Boston before going to Minnesota. Ricky Davis also played better when he was Boston and then he went to Minnesota and became terrible. Why is it no one excelled with KG?

Look at the Spurs in 1993/94 without David Robinson, Vinny Del Negro had the highest PER at 15.3 and those Spurs won 55 games. Why doesn't anyone go to bat for DRob and whine for him? Just keep the whining fair for all players......

Mike James was never a good player to begin with. He had 1 fluke season that he never matched. After KG left, he never put up better than a 11.8 PER

Ricky Davis is another player who wasn't good. Ricky Davis was always terrible. Davis PER actually increased when he left Boston to go to Minnesota. After KG left, Davis only played 3 more NBA seasons and had a 10.7 PER

Blount. Another scrub. In 2007, he actually had his 2nd best career PER. After 2007, he had just 2 more NBA seasons left at 11.1 PER.

Trenton Hassell's career high PER was 10.4. After KG left he had a 6.2 PER for 3 seasons.

Not one of those players put up a 15 PER season after 2007.

Yes but notice those players all played BETTER before joining KG in Minnesota. KG never made a younger player better. He had to join a veteran team that was focused on winning, I don't understand how KG's lack of leadership is never an issue. How he doesn't get along with his teammates, and gets in fights with them. There is a reason why players go to the Spurs and play better. Billups left and was better, same with Marbury, can anyone think of one player that had a career year with Garnett in Minnesota?......

[FX20014]

The 2014 RealGM Top 100 project ranks Kevin Garnett at #11.

Where do you rank KG on your all-time list?

Vote for your ranking in the above poll.

The 2014 RealGM Top 100 project ranks Garnett at #11

Not sure about that. I read the list and I would rank Kobe and a couple of others ahead of KG. To me Garnett was a product of great transcendent player drafted by an incompetent, dysfunctional Timberwolves organization. I think he was too loyal to fault spending 12 yrs in Minny, instead of leaving while still in his prime. Oddly some folks, mostly fans blame KG for the Wolves shortcoming in the playoffs before '04, as if it was all his fault.

Some basketball fans imaginary believe that superstars can win it all on their own which isn't true. In order to win you need to quality role players and great coaching. Something KG didn't have for 12 yrs in Sota, but eventually got in Boston. Guys like Jordan, Russell, Magic, Bird, Kobe, Duncan and others didn't win alone.

SBNation Paul Flannery wrote:
In the 2006 book The Wages of Wins, an economics professor named David Berri laid out another new-wave stat, "wins produced," which crunches standard box-score stats to assign credit to individual players for their team’s success. And according to Berri’s numbers, the best player in the NBA from 2002 to 2006 was not Bryant, who was consistently among the league’s leading scorers during those seasons, or Tim Duncan, who won two of his four championships during that period. It was Kevin Garnett.

In Minnesota, where he played alongside only three fellow All-Stars during his dozen years, Garnett’s skills were enough to produce 50-win seasons, but rarely enough to get out of the first round of the playoffs. In 2004, after the Timberwolves brought in stars Latrell Sprewell and Sam Cassell, the team had its best season ever, advancing to the Western Conference Finals. Garnett was named league MVP — an honor backed up by all the cutting-edge quantitative analysis. In 2005, Garnett put in a similar statistical performance, and again the metrics ranked him as the game’s best player. But Minnesota failed to make the playoffs, and Garnett finished 11th in the MVP voting, without a single first-place vote.

"People looked at Garnett [in Minnesota] and say he’s got all these numbers, but he doesn’t appear to make his team better," Berri says. "Maybe they just weren’t that good."

Interesting facts, because Garnett can be a reluctant scorer at times.

Kevin Garnett 2004, MIN: Team record 58 - 24, Lost WCF to Lakers (4 - 2)
Traditional stats: 24 pts, 14 reb, 5 asts, 2 blks, 2 stls, 50% FG,790% FT
Advanced stats: PER 29.4, On/off +/- +20.2, 18.3 Win Shares, +20 Net ORTG-DRTG, 30.5 Wins Produced
Accolades: MVP, All NBA 1st team, All Defense 1st team, Playoffs led team in points/rebounds/assists/blocks

Garnett in 2004 received more than 99% of the maximum MVP share possible, second to only Shaq in 2000 for the most lopsided MVP vote since the NBA/ABA merger. He did this by becoming the only player since the merger to lead the NBA in both points scored and rebounds in the same season. KG also posted the highest PER and most Win Shares in a season by a power forward in NBA history, the 3rd highest on-court/off-court +/- 82games has ever recorded (KG 03, LeBron 09), and led his team to 58 wins and a #1 seed in a stacked Western Conference. In the postseason KG continued to put up huge counting stats as he carried the Timberwolves to their only playoff series wins in team history by playing every position from point guard to center. And he had the signature game of his career by notching 32 points, 21 rebounds, 5 blocks and 4 steals while scoring all of his team’s 4th quarter field goals in the first game 7 of his life to lead the Wolves to the Conference Finals. When the Sam Cassell and Troy Hudson injuries forced KG to run the PG in the WCF the Wolves were doomed, and eventually they fell to the Shaq/Kobe/Karl Malone/Gary Payton Lakers.

With all that being said, I consider KG between 16-25, of all time NBA greats. I'm sure some of you will disagree, but I got to give credit when it's due. Love him or hate him, Garnett is an all-time great. I've read some of the comments on this board and I just gotta shake my head.

[ElGee]

And?

Mike James had a very good year in 2006 and then went to Minnesota and his production dropped. Mark Blount played better when he was in Boston before going to Minnesota. Ricky Davis also played better when he was Boston and then he went to Minnesota and became terrible. Why is it no one excelled with KG?

Look at the Spurs in 1993/94 without David Robinson, Vinny Del Negro had the highest PER at 15.3 and those Spurs won 55 games. Why doesn't anyone go to bat for DRob and whine for him? Just keep the whining fair for all players......

Mike James was never a good player to begin with. He had 1 fluke season that he never matched. After KG left, he never put up better than a 11.8 PER

Ricky Davis is another player who wasn't good. Ricky Davis was always terrible. Davis PER actually increased when he left Boston to go to Minnesota. After KG left, Davis only played 3 more NBA seasons and had a 10.7 PER

Blount. Another scrub. In 2007, he actually had his 2nd best career PER. After 2007, he had just 2 more NBA seasons left at 11.1 PER.

Trenton Hassell's career high PER was 10.4. After KG left he had a 6.2 PER for 3 seasons.

Not one of those players put up a 15 PER season after 2007.

Yes but notice those players all played BETTER before joining KG in Minnesota. KG never made a younger player better. He had to join a veteran team that was focused on winning, I don't understand how KG's lack of leadership is never an issue. How he doesn't get along with his teammates, and gets in fights with them. There is a reason why players go to the Spurs and play better. Billups left and was better, same with Marbury, can anyone think of one player that had a career year with Garnett in Minnesota?......

I have no interest in discussing KG until we flip roles and you argue for him and I argue against him.

However, for the benefit of the room, to answer your question, just from 99-04 (I won't touch the CBA-level players of 06 and 07 who basically all had career years), the following players had "career years" statistically with Garnett:

-Malik Sealy (2000)
-Joe Smith (2002)
-Wally Szczerbiak (2002? -- Only ASG)
-Troy Hudson (2003)
-Rasho Nesterovic (2003 -- at least offensively)
-Sam Cassell (2004 -- Only ASG)
-Trenton Hassell (2006?)

Of the non-ancient rotational players, Brandon, Peeler, Billups and Sprewell did not have career years. So a majority of the core players had "career years" in this time period...

[G35]

Mike James was never a good player to begin with. He had 1 fluke season that he never matched. After KG left, he never put up better than a 11.8 PER

Ricky Davis is another player who wasn't good. Ricky Davis was always terrible. Davis PER actually increased when he left Boston to go to Minnesota. After KG left, Davis only played 3 more NBA seasons and had a 10.7 PER

Blount. Another scrub. In 2007, he actually had his 2nd best career PER. After 2007, he had just 2 more NBA seasons left at 11.1 PER.

Trenton Hassell's career high PER was 10.4. After KG left he had a 6.2 PER for 3 seasons.

Not one of those players put up a 15 PER season after 2007.

Yes but notice those players all played BETTER before joining KG in Minnesota. KG never made a younger player better. He had to join a veteran team that was focused on winning, I don't understand how KG's lack of leadership is never an issue. How he doesn't get along with his teammates, and gets in fights with them. There is a reason why players go to the Spurs and play better. Billups left and was better, same with Marbury, can anyone think of one player that had a career year with Garnett in Minnesota?......

I have no interest in discussing KG until we flip roles and you argue for him and I argue against him.

However, for the benefit of the room, to answer your question, just from 99-04 (I won't touch the CBA-level players of 06 and 07 who basically all had career years), the following players had "career years" statistically with Garnett:

-Malik Sealy (2000)
-Joe Smith (2002)
-Wally Szczerbiak (2002? -- Only ASG)
-Troy Hudson (2003)
-Rasho Nesterovic (2003 -- at least offensively)
-Sam Cassell (2004 -- Only ASG)
-Trenton Hassell (2006?)

Of the non-ancient rotational players, Brandon, Peeler, Billups and Sprewell did not have career years. So a majority of the core players had "career years" in this time period...

I agree I would really like to see roles reversed just to see if it's even possible.

To your other point, by what metric did you use to judge career years for those players? PER was used prior to your joining the conversation:

Nesterovic's career high per was in Toronto in 2007/08. Rasho also increased his PER in SA the year after he left MIN in 2003.

Malik Sealy actually had a higher PER when he played for the Clippers in in 94/95. In fact Sealy's LOWEST PER was when he was in MIN.

Joe Smith's highest PER was with the Warriors in 95/96; and two of his three worst PER seasons are with MIN.

Troy Hudson's highest PER was with ORL but he only played 23 minutes all season, however his next highest season was with ORL. You should also note EVERY year after Hudson was with MIN his PER decreased.

Cassell did have his best year with MIN, but even then his 5 next best years are with MIL and NJ. Garnett's impact on Cassell is minimal at best.

Hassell's career high PER was with CHI in 01/02 at 10.4; Hassell never exceeds a PER of 10 in any year with KG. What player is so bad that a superstar can't help them get to a 10 PER? That is worse than Luke Walton, Vladimir Radmanovich, Brian Cook, Smush Parker, Devean George, if a star can't get a player to a 10 PER once in four years how much impact does he really have.

I don't know why you included Wally, he was drafted to Minnesota.

Even with all that I still make the claim that David Robinson had similar talent and much, much greater impact and success individually/team than KG.......

[WhateverBro]

I agree I would really like to see roles reversed just to see if it's even possible.

To your other point, by what metric did you use to judge career years for those players? PER was used prior to your joining the conversation:

Nesterovic's career high per was in Toronto in 2007/08. Rasho also increased his PER in SA the year after he left MIN in 2003.

Malik Sealy actually had a higher PER when he played for the Clippers in in 94/95. In fact Sealy's LOWEST PER was when he was in MIN.

Joe Smith's highest PER was with the Warriors in 95/96; and two of his three worst PER seasons are with MIN.

Troy Hudson's highest PER was with ORL but he only played 23 minutes all season, however his next highest season was with ORL. You should also note EVERY year after Hudson was with MIN his PER decreased.

Cassell did have his best year with MIN, but even then his 5 next best years are with MIL and NJ. Garnett's impact on Cassell is minimal at best.

Hassell's career high PER was with CHI in 01/02 at 10.4; Hassell never exceeds a PER of 10 in any year with KG. What player is so bad that a superstar can't help them get to a 10 PER? That is worse than Luke Walton, Vladimir Radmanovich, Brian Cook, Smush Parker, Devean George, if a star can't get a player to a 10 PER once in four years how much impact does he really have.

I don't know why you included Wally, he was drafted to Minnesota.

Even with all that I still make the claim that David Robinson had similar talent and much, much greater impact and success individually/team than KG.......

You're so off-base it's not even funny at this point.

Hudsons best year was clearly in 2003. That's not even debatable, I don't care if his PER was 0.1 the year prior in Orlando, his ORTG went up by 5 and DRTG went down by 1. Not to mention that he had his, by far, most impressive streak of games during that season in the playoffs were he averaged 23.5 ppg (57.4 TS %) and helped Minny push Lakers to six games. I also don't understand why you point out that his PER was decreased every year after that year. 2003 was his peak and in 2004 he injured himself and missed 53 games + the playoffs and was never the same again. That's hardly Garnetts fault.

Re: Cassell. So what if his five other best years were without KG? How is that relevant? He didn't play five years with KG; he played two in Minny and one in Boston when he barely played.

I also don't understand why you're blaming Hassell for his low PER. First off, it's a silly way to judge a player by his PER in the first place and that is glaring with someone like Hassell. He doesn't like to shoot, in fact, he barely did anything except being a great perimeter defender. That was his strength and unfortunately, that's not measured in PER. And it's laughable that you'd even try to argue that Hassell was a better player on those Chicago teams; he clearly peaked in Minny. 2006-2007 was probably his best season of his career, and by the way, look what happened to his career post-KG.

Also, arguing that KG not being able to "lift" one of his teammates to a 10 PER is another horrible way to judge him by. Bill Cartwright hovered around a 10 PER for the Bulls when they won championships. What kind of superstar can't provide more lift to his teammates than that? Is that supposed to be a knock on Jordan? It's a really, really horrible way to try to discredit a player.

[G35]

I agree I would really like to see roles reversed just to see if it's even possible.

To your other point, by what metric did you use to judge career years for those players? PER was used prior to your joining the conversation:

Nesterovic's career high per was in Toronto in 2007/08. Rasho also increased his PER in SA the year after he left MIN in 2003.

Malik Sealy actually had a higher PER when he played for the Clippers in in 94/95. In fact Sealy's LOWEST PER was when he was in MIN.

Joe Smith's highest PER was with the Warriors in 95/96; and two of his three worst PER seasons are with MIN.

Troy Hudson's highest PER was with ORL but he only played 23 minutes all season, however his next highest season was with ORL. You should also note EVERY year after Hudson was with MIN his PER decreased.

Cassell did have his best year with MIN, but even then his 5 next best years are with MIL and NJ. Garnett's impact on Cassell is minimal at best.

Hassell's career high PER was with CHI in 01/02 at 10.4; Hassell never exceeds a PER of 10 in any year with KG. What player is so bad that a superstar can't help them get to a 10 PER? That is worse than Luke Walton, Vladimir Radmanovich, Brian Cook, Smush Parker, Devean George, if a star can't get a player to a 10 PER once in four years how much impact does he really have.

I don't know why you included Wally, he was drafted to Minnesota.

Even with all that I still make the claim that David Robinson had similar talent and much, much greater impact and success individually/team than KG.......

You're so off-base it's not even funny at this point.

Hudsons best year was clearly in 2003. That's not even debatable, I don't care if his PER was 0.1 the year prior in Orlando, his ORTG went up by 5 and DRTG went down by 1. Not to mention that he had his, by far, most impressive streak of games during that season in the playoffs were he averaged 23.5 ppg (57.4 TS %) and helped Minny push Lakers to six games. I also don't understand why you point out that his PER was decreased every year after that year. 2003 was his peak and in 2004 he injured himself and missed 53 games + the playoffs and was never the same again. That's hardly Garnetts fault.

Re: Cassell. So what if his five other best years were without KG? How is that relevant? He didn't play five years with KG; he played two in Minny and one in Boston when he barely played.

I also don't understand why you're blaming Hassell for his low PER. First off, it's a silly way to judge a player by his PER in the first place and that is glaring with someone like Hassell. He doesn't like to shoot, in fact, he barely did anything except being a great perimeter defender. That was his strength and unfortunately, that's not measured in PER. And it's laughable that you'd even try to argue that Hassell was a better player on those Chicago teams; he clearly peaked in Minny. 2006-2007 was probably his best season of his career, and by the way, look what happened to his career post-KG.

Also, arguing that KG not being able to "lift" one of his teammates to a 10 PER is another horrible way to judge him by. Bill Cartwright hovered around a 10 PER for the Bulls when they won championships. What kind of superstar can't provide more lift to his teammates than that? Is that supposed to be a knock on Jordan? It's a really, really horrible way to try to discredit a player.

How am I off base when the whole reason for KG's high ranking is his supposed high impact? Where did this impact show up? On his teammates? Obviously not. On the team? Definitely not. The fact is the new way people want to judge players is, how they play the game. Well honestly, what does that mean? You mean how he dribbles? The way he sets picks? The way he shoots? The way he defends? How is that even logical when you think about it? Everyone does not play the game the same way, some players are physically dominant e.g. Shaq, Wilt, DRob, Lebron, Dr J, Jordan; some players have the mental side down e.g. Russell, Duncan, Bird.

Sometimes I wonder if people ever played on a team and understand the dynamics of making it all work. Every single players situation is unique. Why people compare Kobe and Jordan? Because they look and play similar? That doesn't matter, their situations are completely opposite of one another. Jordan was drafted to be the Bulls savior/rebuilding block. Kobe was just another piece on a team that was suppose to contend for titles, they COULD NOT play the game the same way. It's not logical.

KG played the game in his own unique manner, I do not see anything that makes his case any more special than anyone else's. Typically the best rookies are placed on the worst teams. Does not mean you get any more credit because you have a team of scrubs surrounding you. Anthony Davis is in that situation right now, why should anyone feel sorry for him and give him anything extra considerations. Patrick Ewing had that same problem with the Knicks, who was the best player they put next to him? Oakley? Starks? Harper? Gerald Wilkins? And this is the #1 market in the NBA. Look at the players the Rockets put around Hakeem, they weren't great players either but Hakeem was and he is the #1 reason they won titles. I look at the Trail Blazers this past year and they should not have beaten a more talented Houston Rockets team but their best player posted ridiculous performances to propel his teammates and give them the confidence to win. The Golden State Warriors upset the Nuggets in the first round in 2013, a team that won 10 more games than they did.

It's amazing to me how much Garnett could not get his teammates to be more than the sum of their parts. When finding differences between the very best players it's not talent that separates them. It's not their shooting percentages or efficiency. When ranking great players it's how much they effected their teammates, to say anything is to propound an agenda. I will put that ahead stats and rings.......

[A26B]

20-23