Can someone please explain to me why KG is ranked so high on this site seriously.

[MartinToVaught]

If that is the case then it makes me wonder why isn't Robinson ranked higher then

When you can easily make the same case for him using advanced stats as you can with KG.

DRob should be ranked higher than he traditionally is. It's not his fault that the Spurs surrounded him with a D-League supporting cast and inept coaches at his peak while his peers were on stacked teams.

For whatever reason, people like to give KG a pass for his supporting casts in Minnesota but ignore the weak rosters that DRob was carrying pre-Duncan. At least KG had guys like Cassell, Chauncey, Marbury. The best sidekicks the Spurs could get for peak Robinson were Sean Elliott and Avery Johnson. Good players, but it'd be like if Wally and Terrell Brandon had been the absolute best players the Wolves ever put around KG before he left.

robinson weakness compared to garnett is longevity, his prime was essentially 7 seasons (90-96) then 2 fairly great post injury seasons, then dropped into a good player territory in the 00's

garnett was kinda in his prime from like 1999-2008 then had another 3 strong years in 10-12 then dropped off circa 2013

I value longevity a lot, but I'm pretty sure most fans value peak more (which is how they justify putting MJ over LeBron or Kareem). So I'm not sure that's the rationale for most people.

My theory is that because DRob stayed with the Spurs his whole career and eventually got his rings there, it all just runs together for most people, whereas there's a clean break between KG's Minny years and him joining one of the most stacked teams of all time in Boston that shines more light on the subpar casts he had with the Wolves.

I'd also guess that DRob's case isn't helped by all the undeserved flak he still gets to this day over that Rockets series in '95. KG was never torn down unfairly like that. His WCF appearance in 2004 is talked about with almost the same reverence as a championship, and he even got away with literally crying on the TNT halftime show about how bad his teammates were. (Imagine the reaction if LeBron, Westbrook or PG did that.) For whatever reason, DRob never got that kind of media/fan sympathy, despite the fact that he's a really nice guy by all accounts while KG is not the most likeable personality.

[LAL1947]

Sometimes, individual defender could be essential to slow down opposing star, but that wasn't the case in 2008 finals. It was Celtics trapping and hedging scheme that made Kobe life harder, not individual brilliance.

Okay, fair enough, good point.

Please maintain the same consistency when you talk about 2002-03 semi-finals though. It was mostly D-Rob and Malik Rose on Shaq, with all of Duncan, Bowen, Stephen Jackson, Ginobili, Parker and Claxton providing the help when it came to defending both Shaq and Kobe... not just Duncan's individual brilliance. Duncan was best placed to provide help and did so, as his main assignment, Robert Horry, was a scrub at this point in his career... and Horry's sub was Mark Madsen.

Like here's game 1 of that series. It's a nice game to observe the gulf in quality between the Lakers and Spurs depth (#3-8)... and to observe the Spurs playing good team defense. I know you've already watched these, just posting it for others who may not have seen those full games before.

Watch on YouTube

[falcolombardi]

Sometimes, individual defender could be essential to slow down opposing star, but that wasn't the case in 2008 finals. It was Celtics trapping and hedging scheme that made Kobe life harder, not individual brilliance.

Okay, fair enough, good point.

Please maintain the same consistency when you talk about 2002-03 semi-finals though. It was mostly D-Rob and Malik Rose on Shaq, with all of Duncan, Bowen, Stephen Jackson, Ginobili, Parker and Claxton providing the help when it came to defending both Shaq and Kobe... not just Duncan's individual brilliance. Duncan was best placed to provide help and did so, as his main assignment, Robert Horry, was a scrub at this point in his career... and Horry's sub was Mark Madsen.

Like here's game 1 of that series. It's a nice game to observe the gulf in quality between the Lakers and Spurs depth (#3-8)... and to observe the Spurs playing good team defense. I know you've already watched these, just posting it for others who may not have seen those full games before.

Watch on YouTube

i am really unsure what does this have to do with the topic of garnett ?

nobody here was talking about duncan vs shaq

[LAL1947]

i am really unsure what does this have to do with the topic of garnett ?

nobody here was talking about duncan vs shaq

Good point, let's get back on topic. My bad!

[70sFan]

Okay, fair enough, good point.

Please maintain the same consistency when you talk about 2002-03 semi-finals though. It was mostly D-Rob and Malik Rose on Shaq, with all of Duncan, Bowen, Stephen Jackson, Ginobili, Parker and Claxton providing the help when it came to defending both Shaq and Kobe... not just Duncan's individual brilliance. Duncan was best placed to provide help and did so, as his main assignment, Robert Horry, was a scrub at this point in his career... and Horry's sub was Mark Madsen.

Like here's game 1 of that series. It's a nice game to observe the gulf in quality between the Lakers and Spurs depth (#3-8)... and to observe the Spurs playing good team defense. I know you've already watched these, just posting it for others who may not have seen those full games before.

Watch on YouTube

I don't remember ever giving Duncan credit for Spurs work on Shaq in 2003. As you pointed out correctly, Duncan didn't defend Shaq much in that series. Post players are a bit different and in their cases, individual matchup means a lot more (but still isn't everything).

Duncan was Shaq's main defender only in one series -2002 when Robinson was injured. I give him a lot of credit for slowing down Shaq in that series, but I never do that for 2003.

[tsherkin]

I think Stalwart agrees with you. He provided one example from the four you mentioned, i.e., Pierce... but that does not mean we have forgotten about the double and triple teaming by the others.

I mean, tossing out an anecdote that doesn't accurately capture the team's defensive strategy doesn't really mean much. Wherefore the response.

The person who directly guards a player should rightly get a little more credit than the others providing help, right?

Not really, no. The individual defense mattered far less than the timely help, that was the whole point of Boston's scheme.

His overall intention was simply to say that Garnett did not have the most to do with Kobe's struggles... and he probably agrees with you that Garnett was the most transformative object on their defense too.

Indeed. Here, we all seem to agree.

Notice how Jaivl responded with "slowing down is a team effort" to Stalwart's simple comment that Paul Pierce slowed down Kobe more than the others on that team... yet did not have a similar comment to make to 70sFan about KG being "by far the most responsible for Kobe's struggles".

It's a little similar to how you have asked Stalwart if he seen clips of Kobe getting mobbed rather than ask 70sFan if he seen those same clips... but you have been accurate in everything else you said in your post though.

Deflection? Unnecessary. I can address one post at a time if I feel like it, or am posting from my phone Yes, I could address some of what 70sFan has said as well, but why would I ask 70sFan about those clips when the conversation will bear out just focusing on the dude who I was actually quoting?

[jdzimme3]

Kg was super fun to watch. Built in a lab type body. No major weakness in his game. A tremendous all around player. You can’t fault anyone for loving his game. That said, he never was that alpha number 1 that went out and won games. Accomplished very little until joining Boston and that really wasn’t his prime. I think he is the ultimate number 2 guy, like pippen on steroids. I agree that he is overrated

[tsherkin]

That said, he never was that alpha number 1 that went out and won games. Accomplished very little until joining Boston and that really wasn’t his prime. I think he is the ultimate number 2 guy, like pippen on steroids. I agree that he is overrated

See, and there is a conceit here that the type of player you are discussing is inherently better, but that hasn't been true throughout NBA history. It is only one model, and it is one which has caused a lot of grief to teams attempting its employ. The Celtics in the 60s surely didn't use that model and even Garnett's own career showcases how he can be the centerpiece for the construction of a team without being a wild volume scorer. Tim Duncan, particularly later in his career, shows much the same. Not everyone has to do it like Jordan; MJ actually overturned the idea that a volume scorer CAN'T lead a team to a title, though people often forget this now.

[G35]

DRob should be ranked higher than he traditionally is. It's not his fault that the Spurs surrounded him with a D-League supporting cast and inept coaches at his peak while his peers were on stacked teams.

For whatever reason, people like to give KG a pass for his supporting casts in Minnesota but ignore the weak rosters that DRob was carrying pre-Duncan. At least KG had guys like Cassell, Chauncey, Marbury. The best sidekicks the Spurs could get for peak Robinson were Sean Elliott and Avery Johnson. Good players, but it'd be like if Wally and Terrell Brandon had been the absolute best players the Wolves ever put around KG before he left.

robinson weakness compared to garnett is longevity, his prime was essentially 7 seasons (90-96) then 2 fairly great post injury seasons, then dropped into a good player territory in the 00's

garnett was kinda in his prime from like 1999-2008 then had another 3 strong years in 10-12 then dropped off circa 2013

I value longevity a lot, but I'm pretty sure most fans value peak more (which is how they justify putting MJ over LeBron or Kareem). So I'm not sure that's the rationale for most people.

My theory is that because DRob stayed with the Spurs his whole career and eventually got his rings there, it all just runs together for most people, whereas there's a clean break between KG's Minny years and him joining one of the most stacked teams of all time in Boston that shines more light on the subpar casts he had with the Wolves.

I'd also guess that DRob's case isn't helped by all the undeserved flak he still gets to this day over that Rockets series in '95. KG was never torn down unfairly like that. His WCF appearance in 2004 is talked about with almost the same reverence as a championship, and he even got away with literally crying on the TNT halftime show about how bad his teammates were. (Imagine the reaction if LeBron, Westbrook or PG did that.) For whatever reason, DRob never got that kind of media/fan sympathy, despite the fact that he's a really nice guy by all accounts while KG is not the most likeable personality.

I agree with your theory. A lot of people see KG going to Boston as some sort of validation that the supporting cast is what held him back. Whereas with DRob, Duncan showed up and that is why the Spurs won.

- KG goes to Boston gets the lionshare of the credit
- DRob stays with the Spurs and Duncan gets the majority of the credit

That sort of dissonance is the problem I see on the PC board. Players that had similar circumstances and posters can come to some wildly different conclusions based on who they personally favor.

The example is what you just stated was the Hakeem vs DRob series where Hakeem dominated.

But then posters, especially KG fans, will overlook how Dirk dominated KG in the playoffs.

https://www.mavsmoneyball.com/2022/1/5/22629506/dirk-nowitzkis-best-playoff-series-destroying-garnett

The 2002 series between the Dallas Mavericks and Minnesota Timberwolves contained another matchup of future MVPs that played the same position. In this series, Dirk Nowitzki was downright dominant. Dirk averaged 33.3 points, 15.7 rebounds, .7 assists, 3.0 steals and 1.3 blocks per game. Dirk had an absurd shooting line of 52.6 percent from the floor, 72.7 percent from 3(8 of 11) and 88.9 percent from the free throw line. Garnett averaged 24 points, 18.7 rebounds, 5.0 assists, 1.7 steals and 1.7 blocks per game. Garnett shot 42.9 percent from the field, 50 percent from three(1 of 2) and 71.9 percent from the free throw line.

Garnett had impressive counting numbers but they are not materially different from Robinson’s in his series versus Olajuwon. The reason for the reputation of dominance is because of the team’s victory and the offensive moves that Olajuwon displayed. Dirk’s Mavericks swept Garnett’s Timberwolves with an average margin of victory of 10.7 points per game.

[trex_8063]

OP put up 4 monster posts, none of which talked about defense.

/thread

De....fense???

[Texas Chuck]

We should not overreact to Dream vs Robinson in the playoffs (in the h2h matchups in the RS, its a clear edge for Robinson in everything but scoring volume).

Nor should we overreact to Dirk vs KG in a 3 game series.

All 4 of these guys played too many games to put much stock at all into one series.

[tsherkin]

We should not overreact to Dream vs Robinson in the playoffs (in the h2h matchups in the RS, its a clear edge for Robinson in everything but scoring volume).

I mean, it was a wicked series and a great narrative. But it's also primarily confined to that one series, rather than their matchup history, so it can mean only so much, for sure.

All 4 of these guys played too many games to put much stock at all into one series.

Yeah, it's just too small of a sample to matter in the broader comparison. For that series, sure, but beyond that, it doesn't mean anything. It certainly adds to Olajuwon's in-season narrative, of course, but not outside of it.

[falcolombardi]

We should not overreact to Dream vs Robinson in the playoffs (in the h2h matchups in the RS, its a clear edge for Robinson in everything but scoring volume).

Nor should we overreact to Dirk vs KG in a 3 game series.

All 4 of these guys played too many games to put much stock at all into one series.

i have read that spurs tried to guard hakeem straight up with no help so they could shut down his teammates (which was the worse way to defend hakeem), whereas the rockets made sure to send double teams often to stop robinson

is that the case?

also that series seems to have been a lot closer than it is talked about like, the winning margins by houston were fairly thin and it could be argued rockets had a significantly better supporting cast with drexler and horry

[xinxin]

KG had a rep, like CWebb, of avoiding the ball during crunch time. He’d gladly pass the ball to Pierce (Celtics) or Sprew/Cassell, (wolves) like it was a hot potato…


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Texas Chuck]

We should not overreact to Dream vs Robinson in the playoffs (in the h2h matchups in the RS, its a clear edge for Robinson in everything but scoring volume).

Nor should we overreact to Dirk vs KG in a 3 game series.

All 4 of these guys played too many games to put much stock at all into one series.

i have read that spurs tried to guard hakeem straight up with no help so they could shut down his teammates (which was the worse way to defend hakeem), whereas the rockets made sure to send double teams often to stop robinson

is that the case?

also that series seems to have been a lot closer than it is talked about like, the winning margins by houston were fairly thin and it could be argued rockets had a significantly better supporting cast with drexler and horry

I personally have no idea the details of the series, though there are definitely posters here who will know. I just know I used to accept that Dream must have dominated Robinson because that was such a strong narrative until finally about 6 or 7 years ago I actually went and looked at them h2h over their careers and it tells a vastly different story.

Now some of that is with an aging Dream, but even in just the games where he was still playing at a high level, we see that Robinson's teams won most of those games--which is the best analog we have for their defensive impact and the only edge offensively for Dream is volume, but Robinson was notably more efficient.

Now Dream had a better career of course. But this idea that he just totally owned Robinson is actually quite false and its built on a sample size of one series.

[trex_8063]

We should not overreact to Dream vs Robinson in the playoffs (in the h2h matchups in the RS, its a clear edge for Robinson in everything but scoring volume).

Nor should we overreact to Dirk vs KG in a 3 game series.

All 4 of these guys played too many games to put much stock at all into one series.

i have read that spurs tried to guard hakeem straight up with no help so they could shut down his teammates (which was the worse way to defend hakeem), whereas the rockets made sure to send double teams often to stop robinson

is that the case?

also that series seems to have been a lot closer than it is talked about like, the winning margins by houston were fairly thin and it could be argued rockets had a significantly better supporting cast with drexler and horry

I personally have no idea the details of the series, though there are definitely posters here who will know. I just know I used to accept that Dream must have dominated Robinson because that was such a strong narrative until finally about 6 or 7 years ago I actually went and looked at them h2h over their careers and it tells a vastly different story.

Now some of that is with an aging Dream, but even in just the games where he was still playing at a high level, we see that Robinson's teams won most of those games--which is the best analog we have for their defensive impact and the only edge offensively for Dream is volume, but Robinson was notably more efficient.

Now Dream had a better career of course. But this idea that he just totally owned Robinson is actually quite false and its built on a sample size of one series.

I logged a couple games from this series, noting how often the two respective superstars were being doubled [or tripled] when they received the ball, and posted on this. I'd maybe be able to find the post [was years ago], but the search post function is out. I can't believe I didn't archive that post/data; friggin' idiot I am.....

Anyway, yes: Robinson was indeed facing doubles much more often (it was >twice as often, iirc).
Rodman [in addition to being a cancerous distraction] was playing crap defense thru much of the series too (it's a big part of why Robert Horry went off for significantly better than his rs standard in that series).
If I recall, DRob's supporting cast crapped the bed from 3pt range in the series, too; but maybe I misremember that..........no, I don't (just looked it up): despite all the doubles Robinson got, the Spurs shot just 12 3PA/game (vs 14.1 in rs) and made just 31.9% (vs 37.5% in rs [bear in mind this was one of the years with the shortened line]). Credit some to the Rockets perimeter D; but Robinson was finding them for open looks and sometimes they were just missing.

Game 6 (5pt loss), Spurs were just 2 of 7 from 3pt range. The Rockets, meanwhile, took 30 3pt attempts that game, although only made 8. Most of that was Robert Horry (again, Rodman was pretty much an absent defender by this point): he was 6 of 11 from 3pt range in the game.
In game 1 (1 pt loss), Spurs were just 2 of 8 from downtown.
Game 2 (10 pts loss), they were 4 of 18 (while the Rockets shooters lit them up 9 for 19 [Horry, again: 5 of 9]).


There was a lot going on in that series. It wasn't as simple as "Hakeem pwned Robinson".

[tsherkin]

There was a lot going on in that series. It wasn't as simple as "Hakeem pwned Robinson".

That was the case the year before as well. The 94 Rockets were precursors to the 2011 Mavs in the sense of a really unremarkable (conceptually) supporting cast notably outperforming expectations.

[jdzimme3]

That said, he never was that alpha number 1 that went out and won games. Accomplished very little until joining Boston and that really wasn’t his prime. I think he is the ultimate number 2 guy, like pippen on steroids. I agree that he is overrated

See, and there is a conceit here that the type of player you are discussing is inherently better, but that hasn't been true throughout NBA history. It is only one model, and it is one which has caused a lot of grief to teams attempting its employ. The Celtics in the 60s surely didn't use that model and even Garnett's own career showcases how he can be the centerpiece for the construction of a team without being a wild volume scorer. Tim Duncan, particularly later in his career, shows much the same. Not everyone has to do it like Jordan; MJ actually overturned the idea that a volume scorer CAN'T lead a team to a title, though people often forget this now.

Being able to get buckets when it matters is a pretty pivotal skill when you start talking about the top 15 players of all time. I don’t even like Kobe but with two minutes left in a close playoff game I know o want kobe over Garnett. It isn’t all about volume scoring it is about being able to will a team to victory by scoring when needed.

[tsherkin]

Being able to get buckets when it matters is a pretty pivotal skill when you start talking about the top 15 players of all time. I don’t even like Kobe but with two minutes left in a close playoff game I know o want kobe over Garnett. It isn’t all about volume scoring it is about being able to will a team to victory by scoring when needed.

There are different routes to success. Defensive excellence is one of them. I come back to the 04 Wolves. They were getting away with Sam Cassell and Latrell Sprewell as their perimeter scoring threats and likely would have won a ring if Alien (old Cassell, no less) had stayed healthy.

Like I said, there's a conceit that offense drives all, and in some cases, that's true. But there are some guys who have such defensive value that they can be the focus of your team and the best player on the team and not the guy you go to for a clutch basket. And there's also some mathematical evidence to suggest that clutch play is relevant only so often and isn't necessarily important to actually dominating enough to win a title. Kobe's reputation far outstrips his actual efficacy in traditionally-defined "clutch" situations. Burying teams before that mattered? Different story, obviously, because Kobe is an ATG player. But there's a looooooot of talk about stuff that really doesn't come up that often at all. And KG is a dude who can position his team to win without overshooting.

Lots of narrative weight to the idea, though, so it's tough to discuss with most.