2002-’08 Kevin Garnett or 2003-’09 Kobe Bryant

[Matt15]

Which player would you rather have for 7 years?

[TheGOATRises007]

I'd rather have Kobe.

I'm not that high on KG at all. But I know you can argue for KG.

[dygaction]

Nice 7 year window to include the only championship KG had and limit Kobe's championship to 1. To compare with anyone else, I bet KG's 09 would be a good inclusion as well.

Still Kobe, much better playoff success and only missed playoffs one year. They both missed playoffs in 05 but Kobe did a much better carrying job in 06 and 07.

Playoff games played:
KG - 53
Kobe - 90
Playoff series wins:
KG - 6
Kobe - 11

[feyki]

Most of coaches would pick Kobe, I think. But I'd evaluate players based on adjusted team and league ratings at 100 poss,100 Off/Def Rating, %15 Orb, %15 TO etc. etc..

So, I'd rank them based on adjusted relative league SRS per game(it's also need to adjusting stamina before the 3 point line using). It's about the Kobe with 36 and KG with 34. Really close, less than half SRS a year.

[Jaivl]

On my book 02-08 Garnett is more or less equivalent to 02-10 Kobe.

[HeartBreakKid]

Nice 7 year window to include the only championship KG had and limit Kobe's championship to 1. To compare with anyone else, I bet KG's 09 would be a good inclusion as well.

Still Kobe, much better playoff success and only missed playoffs one year. They both missed playoffs in 05 but Kobe did a much better carrying job in 06 and 07.

Playoff games played:
KG - 53
Kobe - 90
Playoff series wins:
KG - 6
Kobe - 11

This is a pretty lazy way of comparing players, I mean there isn't a single post in here about either players ability, it's simply who won more playoff games. If you were in a random bar and asked some guy who watches basketball maybe a few times a year, he could make the same argument - so how accurate do you think something like that could possibly be?


you're comparing the Lakers (goat franchise) to the Timberwolves (woat franchise) and one year on the Celtics. Kobe Bryant had prime Shaq and even Karl Malone during this stretch. Then obtained Gasol and Odom for another two years.

Garnett had one year where he played with Pierce and Allen, and another year where he played with a healthy Sam Cassell (and he still got hurt in the WCF).


Garnett and Kobe both missed the playoffs in 2005 - except Garnett's team won 44 games, and Kobe's won 34. So yes...I guess Kobe did "carry" the 06 and 07 teams harder..to 45 wins and 42 wins. I mean you really don't see any logical fallacy there? The 2005 Timberwolves had a winning record and still missed the playoffs. The 06 Lakers won one more game than the 05 Wolves, and the 07 Lakers won two less games than the 05 Wolves and they could make the post season.

It's pretty obvious that the 06 and 07 Wolves didn't make the playoffs is because they got really damn bad. I mean by 2006 Cassell was off the team and Sprewell was out of the NBA. Wally and Ricky Davis were now the best playes and they each played less than 40 games that season. If Lamar Odom had played less than 40 games there is no way the 06 and 07 Lakers make the playoffs, heck he only played 52 games and the 07 Lakers won 3 less games than the 06 variation and were one game over .500.

We already see a player like Steph Curry not able to get top 8 seeding at this point in the season, and the guy was one of the premier players of his era.




Garnett probably did subconsciously play worse during 06 and 07 but those teams were so far below .500 it wouldn't have made a difference. The team had little talent AND was injury prone - in the Western conference there isn't much someone can do about that. Isn't that game over?

[migya]

It's all about what other players are around them. Garnett needs two at least good scorers for his team to succeed and Kobe needs a very good big and some good role players.

[HeartBreakKid]

It's all about what other players are around them. Garnett needs two at least good scorers for his team to succeed and Kobe needs a very good big and some good role players.

He was plenty successful with just Sam Cassell. Sam Cassell got injured in the WCF (the round prior actually) and started to miss games.


It's not true at all that Garnett needs a big 3 to win. I'm not sure how anyone can conclude that the Timberwolves in 2004 were not serious contenders if not the favorites with a relatively unimpressive roster (for a championship team). The 2nd best player got injured when they lost to a superteam.

In fact, why couldn't he just win with a 1-2 punch? What if Garnett played with Dwayne Wade? That wouldn't win a ring? (and you can't say that's not a fair teammate because Bryant for example has had Shaq as his teammate, and Wade has been other great players teammates). You're pretty much saying Garnett needs 2 scorers because that's what he actually won a ring with.


I don't see why Bryant "needs" a big man also. That's just what he had when he won rings, there's nothing to suggest that he wouldn't do well with another good perimeter player like Michael Jordan did for example.

[dygaction]

At their level I don’t think regular season or “what if’s”means much. You can argue KG with Wade might win but KG would be robin on that team. KG and Kobe started with crappy teams in 2005, with Kobe’s being even worse. Kobe rebuilt that team with an upward trend every year. Missing, first round, first round, finals, and championship. KG’s was missing, missing badly, missing even worse, big 3 in Boston for championship. That’s different levels of value no matter if you look at from player, fans, or teams perspective.

Nice 7 year window to include the only championship KG had and limit Kobe's championship to 1. To compare with anyone else, I bet KG's 09 would be a good inclusion as well.

Still Kobe, much better playoff success and only missed playoffs one year. They both missed playoffs in 05 but Kobe did a much better carrying job in 06 and 07.

Playoff games played:
KG - 53
Kobe - 90
Playoff series wins:
KG - 6
Kobe - 11

This is a pretty lazy way of comparing players, I mean there isn't a single post in here about either players ability, it's simply who won more playoff games. If you were in a random bar and asked some guy who watches basketball maybe a few times a year, he could make the same argument - so how accurate do you think something like that could possibly be?


you're comparing the Lakers (goat franchise) to the Timberwolves (woat franchise) and one year on the Celtics. Kobe Bryant had prime Shaq and even Karl Malone during this stretch. Then obtained Gasol and Odom for another two years.

Garnett had one year where he played with Pierce and Allen, and another year where he played with a healthy Sam Cassell (and he still got hurt in the WCF).


Garnett and Kobe both missed the playoffs in 2005 - except Garnett's team won 44 games, and Kobe's won 34. So yes...I guess Kobe did "carry" the 06 and 07 teams harder..to 45 wins and 42 wins. I mean you really don't see any logical fallacy there? The 2005 Timberwolves had a winning record and still missed the playoffs. The 06 Lakers won one more game than the 05 Wolves, and the 07 Lakers won two less games than the 05 Wolves and they could make the post season.

It's pretty obvious that the 06 and 07 Wolves didn't make the playoffs is because they got really damn bad. I mean by 2006 Cassell was off the team and Sprewell was out of the NBA. Wally and Ricky Davis were now the best playes and they each played less than 40 games that season. If Lamar Odom had played less than 40 games there is no way the 06 and 07 Lakers make the playoffs, heck he only played 52 games and the 07 Lakers won 3 less games than the 06 variation and were one game over .500.

We already see a player like Steph Curry not able to get top 8 seeding at this point in the season, and the guy was one of the premier players of his era.




Garnett probably did subconsciously play worse during 06 and 07 but those teams were so far below .500 it wouldn't have made a difference. The team had little talent AND was injury prone - in the Western conference there isn't much someone can do about that. Isn't that game over?

[sansterre]

At their level I don’t think regular season or “what if’s”means much. You can argue KG with Wade might win but KG would be robin on that team. KG and Kobe started with crappy teams in 2005, with Kobe’s being even worse. Kobe rebuilt that team with an upward trend every year. Missing, first round, first round, finals, and championship. KG’s was missing, missing badly, missing even worse, big 3 in Boston for championship. That’s different levels of value no matter if you look at from player, fans, or teams perspective.

Wow. I didn't realize that Kobe traded for Pau Gasol! I've heard that Kobe put in more work off the court than anyone, but I never realized that he was literally running the front office!

I guess the moral of the story is that Garnett was simply a far worse GM than Kobe Bryant. And the OP never actually said that we were considering their on-court contributions only, so I suppose when we take into account Kobe's implied trading and drafting acumen his position does improve considerably.

[dygaction]

At their level I don’t think regular season or “what if’s”means much. You can argue KG with Wade might win but KG would be robin on that team. KG and Kobe started with crappy teams in 2005, with Kobe’s being even worse. Kobe rebuilt that team with an upward trend every year. Missing, first round, first round, finals, and championship. KG’s was missing, missing badly, missing even worse, big 3 in Boston for championship. That’s different levels of value no matter if you look at from player, fans, or teams perspective.

Wow. I didn't realize that Kobe traded for Pau Gasol! I've heard that Kobe put in more work off the court than anyone, but I never realized that he was literally running the front office!

I guess the moral of the story is that Garnett was simply a far worse GM than Kobe Bryant. And the OP never actually said that we were considering their on-court contributions only, so I suppose when we take into account Kobe's implied trading and drafting acumen his position does improve considerably.

No KG was a far better GM by completely form a big 3 out of nowhere.

[sansterre]

At their level I don’t think regular season or “what if’s”means much. You can argue KG with Wade might win but KG would be robin on that team. KG and Kobe started with crappy teams in 2005, with Kobe’s being even worse. Kobe rebuilt that team with an upward trend every year. Missing, first round, first round, finals, and championship. KG’s was missing, missing badly, missing even worse, big 3 in Boston for championship. That’s different levels of value no matter if you look at from player, fans, or teams perspective.

Wow. I didn't realize that Kobe traded for Pau Gasol! I've heard that Kobe put in more work off the court than anyone, but I never realized that he was literally running the front office!

I guess the moral of the story is that Garnett was simply a far worse GM than Kobe Bryant. And the OP never actually said that we were considering their on-court contributions only, so I suppose when we take into account Kobe's implied trading and drafting acumen his position does improve considerably.

No KG was a far better GM by completely form a big 3 out of nowhere.

I'm persuaded!

Garnett "rebuilt" his 32-win team into a 66-win team. That's pretty impressive!

[No-more-rings]

I think 04 and 05 hurt Kobe too much in this one.

[sansterre]

Regular Season, just offensive numbers:

Kobe: 33.0% Usage, +3.0% shooting, 3.4% ORB, 25.3% AST, 10.9% TO, 6.0 OBPM
Garnett: 26.8% Usage, +3.1% shooting, 8.6% ORB, 22.9% AST, 11.6% TO, 5.6 OBPM

So they shot with comparable efficiency (Kobe carried way more volume though), Garnett was a much better rebounder (duh) and ultimately OBPM considers Kobe to be the slightly better offensive player. Of course, Garnett was light-years ahead of Kobe on defense, so I'd say regular-season-wise, Garnett has a pretty massive lead.

Playoffs, just offense:

Kobe: 32.0% Usage, +1.7% shooting, 2.3% ORB, 24.9% AST, 10.8% TO, 5.8 OBPM
Garnett: 28.2% Usage, +0.1% shooting, 7.8% ORB, 21.2% AST, 12.3% TO, 4.1 OBPM

Kobe shines more here, still carrying more load (though the gap dropped a lot) and shooting with more efficiency. OBPM likes Kobe more in the playoffs by a respectable bit. Though, again, Garnett's defense was almost certainly more than 1.7 points better than Kobe's.

Unadjusted +/- for Regular Season:

Kobe: Off Court -3.3, On Court +4.8, On/Off +8.1
Garnett: Off Court -8.0, On Court +5.4, On/Off +13.4

Holy balls. Garnett's team was the worse when the stars weren't on the court, and the better when they were.

Unadjusted +/- for Playoffs (Sample Size Alert!):

Kobe: Off Court -7.3, On Court +2.7, On/Off +10.0
Garnett: Off Court -18.2, On Court +4.6, On/Off +22.8

Same pattern.

AuRPM (regular season only), in descending order of value:

Kobe: +7.2, +6.8, +6.1, +6.0, +4.1, +2.8, +1.4
Garnett: +11.5, +9.2, +8.5, +7.6, +5.7, +5.6, +4.5

Garnett pretty consistently showed AuRPMs a little over 2.5 points higher than Kobe over these timeframes.

Offensive box metrics think that Kobe was the slightly better offensive player in the regular season, and a notably better offensive player in the postseason. But the impact stats (which include defensive impact) all have Garnett as being way more valuable.

These are only stats. They're imperfect. But Garnett seems the pretty obvious answer here, within the limits of the above data.

[ThePersianFreak]

Kobe. Just because i konw everyone here would peak KG and i don't think it's as one sided as some want to make it.

[Max123]

Kobe. Just because i konw everyone here would peak KG and i don't think it's as one sided as some want to make it.

What would be your case for Kobe?


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

[ThePersianFreak]

Kobe. Just because i konw everyone here would peak KG and i don't think it's as one sided as some want to make it.

What would be your case for Kobe?


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

My pick is actually KG. I just wanted to make the result more fair. Because depending on your roster Kobe could be a better option.
My reasoning is that i think replacing KG's defense with multiple role players is easier than replacing Kobe's offense, specially in halfcourt.

[Cavsfansince84]

It's not true at all that Garnett needs a big 3 to win. I'm not sure how anyone can conclude that the Timberwolves in 2004 were not serious contenders if not the favorites with a relatively unimpressive roster (for a championship team). The 2nd best player got injured when they lost to a superteam.

In fact, why couldn't he just win with a 1-2 punch? What if Garnett played with Dwayne Wade? That wouldn't win a ring? (and you can't say that's not a fair teammate because Bryant for example has had Shaq as his teammate, and Wade has been other great players teammates). You're pretty much saying Garnett needs 2 scorers because that's what he actually won a ring with.


I don't see why Bryant "needs" a big man also. That's just what he had when he won rings, there's nothing to suggest that he wouldn't do well with another good perimeter player like Michael Jordan did for example.

I agree that one good scorer is probably enough to contend with KG, more so given that Pierce and Allen were both below 20ppg when they played with KG and his scoring was down to like 17ppg. So if we take 04 level KG at 24ppg and give him another good scorer in the 25ppg realm who can duplicate it in the playoffs it would probably be enough. Regarding Kobe, there is a longer number of years where we can see what the constants were on his successful teams as well as Kobe's need I would say to get a lot of shots. The constants were Phil as hc and teams which were I think top 4 in rebounding every year he won a title(sometimes #1). So putting Kobe on a random team with another high scoring wing and without Phil as hc is very hard to truly things to try and predict imo. I wouldn't want to bet money on that team doing much personally. So it might be going too far to say he needs those things but I think if you take away those things it leaves a lot of big question marks about Kobe's ability to win.

[Kobe187]

KG is really overrated on these boards, he was always a complimentary piece and couldn’t take over games single handedly. He was never really the focal point offensively and was a tad overrated defensively. He’s no where near a Tim Duncan in terms of impact. Easy answer here is Kobe, The Mamba would break down double teams, was an excellent defender, 2nd greatest offensive player behind only MJ, incredible talent.

[HeartBreakKid]

KG is really overrated on these boards, he was always a complimentary piece and couldn’t take over games single handedly. He was never really the focal point offensively and was a tad overrated defensively. He’s no where near a Tim Duncan in terms of impact. Easy answer here is Kobe, The Mamba would break down double teams, was an excellent defender, 2nd greatest offensive player behind only MJ, incredible talent.

At first I was going to write a well thought out response but then I noticed the username.

To de-troll my post a bit, Kobe Bryant being the 2nd best offensive layer behind MJ is wrong for so many reasons. He's wasn't even the best scorer on most of his championship teams, and he's not exactly a Magic Johnson level passer.