What makes Tim Duncan better than Kevin Garnett

[M.Bustly15A5RU8]

It seems to be the consensus that Tim Duncan is better than Kevin Garnett. But what exactly makes him better? Do you think Tim Duncan could've led the Timberwolves farther than Kevin Garnett did?

[DonCorleone]

Tim Duncan is/was a better scorer, blocker, passer, versatile offensive and defensive player than KG.

I don't judge soley on chips.

[STATUTORY]

Popovich elevated Duncan's game while KG had to figure everything out for hiself

[Colby Brian]

duncans a little overrated IMO, but hes better than KG,

duncan - 3 finals mvps

[DonCorleone]

Popovich elevated Duncan's game while KG had to figure everything out for hiself

We can only judge based on how they played.

From 99'-Present

1. Shaquille Rashuan O'neal

2. Timothy Theodore Duncan

3. Kobe Bean Bryant

[jlip]

Tim Duncan is/was a better scorer, blocker, passer, versatile offensive and defensive player than KG.

I don't judge soley on chips.

In what way was Duncan ever a better passer than KG?

[04mzwach]

Tim Duncan is/was a better scorer, blocker, passer, versatile offensive and defensive player than KG.

I don't judge soley on chips.
questionable...

[DonCorleone]

In what way was Duncan ever a better passer than KG?

I'll give you that.

[DonCorleone]

questionable...

Tim Duncan was a better blocker in his prime.

[Colby Brian]

We can only judge based on how they played.

From 99'-Present

1. Shaquille Rashuan O'neal

2. Timothy Theodore Duncan

3. Kobe Bean Bryant

IMO:

1.shaq

2.kobe

3.duncan

kobes still beastin tho
duncan was great in 01-03

[Alamo]

Because Tim Duncan is the greatest PF to ever play the game and Kevin Garnett isn't.

When it comes to skill and talent, it's a toss up. But Tim Duncan has multiple MVPs, multiple FMVPs, and multiple rings. One of the greediest players of all time.

[M.Bustly15A5RU8]

Because Tim Duncan is the greatest PF to ever play the game and Kevin Garnett isn't.

When it comes to skill and talent, it's a toss up. But Tim Duncan has multiple MVPs, multiple FMVPs, and multiple rings. One of the greediest players of all time.

Do you think Tim Duncan could've lead the Timberwolves farther than Kevin Garnett did?

[DonCorleone]

IMO:

1.shaq

2.kobe

3.duncan

kobes still beastin tho
duncan was great in 01-03

I think (not referring to you) that a lot of people never watched Duncan in his prime. He was amazing.

[DonCorleone]

Do you think Tim Duncan could've lead the Timberwolves farther than Kevin Garnett did?

No. But I doubt Kevin wins 4 rings with the Spurs.

It is why I judge based on individual talent.

[Kellogs4toniee]

Practically speaking it might very well have been just the organization and the coaching system fit for Duncan much more naturally from the start. But when you factor in luck to the NBA equation of "who's a better player", then your opening up not just a whole new chapter, but a whole new encyclopedia on what ifs and should have been's.

Nothing really separates them from a hypothetical standpoint. There both incredible and there skillsets are very close. Career wise both have similar stats. Duncan has a slightly higher PPG and more rebounds, but Garnett's passing skills have been one of his elite traits for his entire career. One is more vocal while the other lets his play do more of the talking.

What ultimately puts Duncan higher on the list is his accolades: rings, final mvp's, # of play-off games, etc. All that can be put on paper and is factual.

When you have two players at the same position. Both were among the top of the game for a consistent # of years. Both had amazing primes. Both sustained eliteness for a very long time. What makes one better than the other has to be success, and simply put Duncan has had more success.

[SCdac]

I think (not referring to you) that a lot of people never watched Duncan in his prime. He was amazing.

Oh, that's quite evident on this board. I'd venture to say many people on this board are 18-20 years old, they were roughly 5-7 years old when Duncan entered the league out of college. The dude had a fundamental understanding of defense and offense, not to mention could put the ball on the floor, take it to the basket, shoot a jumper, or post people up with great effectiveness. Much more well rounded than given credit for.... by youngins.

[PowerGlove]

Tim Duncan is/was a better scorer, blocker, passer, versatile offensive and defensive player than KG.

I don't judge soley on chips.
:roll:

So KG just isnt shit these days huh? GTFO.

[PowerGlove]

Oh, that's quite evident on this board. I'd venture to say many people on this board are 18-20 years old, they were roughly 5-7 years old when Duncan entered the league out of college. The dude had a fundamental understanding of defense and offense, not to mention could put the ball on the floor, take it to the basket, shoot a jumper, or post people up with great effectiveness. Much more well rounded than given credit for.... by youngins.

Because we were still in our diapers in 2000-2005...:rolleyes:

[SCdac]

Because we were still in our diapers in 2000-2005...:rolleyes:

hey, if you're older/old enough to have understood basketball at the time Duncan came into the league, let alone earlier.... than I'm not referring to you.

But, to me, it's clear that people don't have a very clear recollection of prime Duncan - I'd guess because of age combined with SAS not being the most popular team.

[Gear2]

Practically speaking it might very well have been just the organization and the coaching system fit for Duncan much more naturally from the start. But when you factor in luck to the NBA equation of "who's a better player", then your opening up not just a whole new chapter, but a whole new encyclopedia on what ifs and should have been's.

Nothing really separates them from a hypothetical standpoint. There both incredible and there skillsets are very close. Career wise both have similar stats. Duncan has a slightly higher PPG and more rebounds, but Garnett's passing skills have been one of his elite traits for his entire career. One is more vocal while the other lets his play do more of the talking.

What ultimately puts Duncan higher on the list is his accolades: rings, final mvp's, # of play-off games, etc. All that can be put on paper and is factual.

When you have two players at the same position. Both were among the top of the game for a consistent # of years. Both had amazing primes. Both sustained eliteness for a very long time. What makes one better than the other has to be success, and simply put Duncan has had more success.

Great post. Well said :applause:

[DonCorleone]

:roll:

So KG just isnt shit these days huh? GTFO.

What? KG is a great player. He's better than Duncan right now but in their primes Duncan was better.

[PowerGlove]

What? KG is a great player. He's better than Duncan right now but in their primes Duncan was better.
He just said Duncan was better at almost every category outside of athleticsm... which is a flat out lie.

EDIT:You...just said. Stop lying.

[SCdac]

Duncan is not independent of his own success... he's, absolutely, the reason for it.

[DonCorleone]

He just said Duncan was better at almost every category outside of athleticsm... which is a flat out lie.

EDIT:You...just said. Stop lying.

I gave KG passing later.

But Duncan was a better scorer, blocker and that can't be denied.

KG was a better rebounder. And KG was a better passer.

I don't worship players. So don't expect me to.

[TaLvsCuaL]

Your brain. :pimp:

[PowerGlove]

Duncan is not independent of his own success... he's, absolutely, the reason for it.
I thought accolades success made you greater, not better. If you had to choose in a pickup game between the two prime players it would be tough.

[Alamo]

Do you think Tim Duncan could've lead the Timberwolves farther than Kevin Garnett did?

I don't know. It's impossible to tell because everything would be different. But what I do know is that Tim Duncan + San Antonio Spurs = 4 Championships & 3 Finals MVPS & 2 NBA MVPs & NBA ROTY. That's something that will never change.

[SCdac]

I thought accolades success made you greater, not better. If you had to choose in a pickup game between the two prime players it would be tough.

I agree it would be tough. But Duncan greatly caused those accolades, didn't just receive them, and then all of sudden "he's become a greater player".

1 pick up game of two players does not provide for a good comparison. I bet prime Allen Iverson could beat Jordan in a single pick up game, but I'd hardly pick him over Jordan.

I'm not going to deny team-factors in each players success, that would be short sighted, but some posters go too far with that. As if Duncan and Garnett didn't have effects, either positive or negative or both, on their own teams.

[solar.hands]

maybe we'll know the answer if they meet in this years finals.
It would be epic...

[PowerGlove]

I agree it would be tough. But Duncan greatly caused those accolades, didn't just receive them, and then all of sudden "he's become a greater player"

1 pick up game of two players does not provide for a good comparison. I bet prime Allen Iverson could beat Jordan in a single pick up game, but I'd hardly pick him over Jordan.

I'm not going to deny team-factors in each players success, that would be short sighted, but some posters go too far with that. As if Duncan and Garnett didn't have effects, either positive or negative or both, on their own teams.

Honestly, I believe that if KG just bailed on the Wolves earlier and joined another team, he would have equaled or at least be just as "great" as Duncan is.

As players, KG and Duncan are really close. I understand that the result of a pickup game doesnt determine who is better but that's not what I was asking. When you are choosing a player to be on your team, you look for who's better... and I believe that it's really close between two.

[ballerz]

would of been great to see kg with some talent around him. imagine 2004 garnett playing with other reliable scoring options

[get these NETS]

Duncan was a better player BECAUSE on top of their at-one-point identical individual accolades.....all nba first team offense and defense...

Duncan was THE go to guy at crunch time, where that was never Garnett's role...not in Min. and not in Boston.


look up KG's stats in all those closeout games when his team got knocked out of the first round.....I'd guess he rubbed vanishing lotion over his body...and especially in the fourth quarter...


That's what TD brought to the Spurs....even playing with an all time great center....Duncan was THE guy in crunchtime...doubt KG could or would have filled that role

[Harison]

To answer OP - success. Playing with a better team and with HoF coach entire career helps, a lot. When post-prime KG joined good team, suddenly he was doing better than Duncan's Spurs. In the end its a team sport, one player can only get you so far.

I still see myth about KG disappearance in the clutch, despite the fact his clutch data is very similar to Duncan's:

http://elgee35.wordpress.com/2011/01/10/the-nbas-best-players-in-the-clutch-since-2003/

"And, with regards to his chief rival, Tim Duncan, KG

[STATUTORY]

KG is still a top PF in the league while Duncan playing like doo doo and getting carried by Tony Parker

[ginobli2311]

interior defense and post play.

[Eat Like A Bosh]

Actually Kevin Garnett and Tim Duncan are both great players, Hard to tell which one was better. Duncan might have a slight more consistency and shot blocking, but Kevin Garnett was more versatile and was capable of being point forward in Minny.
In terms of impact, they are both extremely close. The Spurs just happened to have better management, and a great coach, that built a great team around Duncan. Therefore Duncan had more success throughout his career.
Not Kevin Garnett's fault that he got stuck in shitty Minnesota T-wolves, the 2nd best player was Sam Cassell ffs.

Right now most people would rank Duncan over Kevin Garnett because of the rings. I guess I have to agree, because winning is major in ranking players. So I would give the slight edge to Duncan.

But in terms of impact on a team, they are both extremely close, and if they both had the same amount of rings, it really could go either way.

[Eat Like A Bosh]

Practically speaking it might very well have been just the organization and the coaching system fit for Duncan much more naturally from the start. But when you factor in luck to the NBA equation of "who's a better player", then your opening up not just a whole new chapter, but a whole new encyclopedia on what ifs and should have been's.

Nothing really separates them from a hypothetical standpoint. There both incredible and there skillsets are very close. Career wise both have similar stats. Duncan has a slightly higher PPG and more rebounds, but Garnett's passing skills have been one of his elite traits for his entire career. One is more vocal while the other lets his play do more of the talking.

What ultimately puts Duncan higher on the list is his accolades: rings, final mvp's, # of play-off games, etc. All that can be put on paper and is factual.

When you have two players at the same position. Both were among the top of the game for a consistent # of years. Both had amazing primes. Both sustained eliteness for a very long time. What makes one better than the other has to be success, and simply put Duncan has had more success.
:applause: Very well said.
So basically KG was just unfortunate to have bad mangement and land on a crap team...

[get these NETS]

quick points

who was this hof coach that duncan played for?

duncan's coachability and stellar play throughout his career is what made popovich a hof coach

what was his winning % as head coach before duncan?

stop implying that pop was already a legendary coach when duncan got drafted.



the year kg had a real team of players.....he played out of his mind in the playoffs....but no ring.....

[GiveItToBurrito]

Better rim protector, he always played in the system and wouldn't leave his feat or his position, but he still blocked a lot of shots. Other than that, although they're stylistically different, the only thing Duncan had that Garnett didn't was a rock solid organization and better teammates. No disrespect to him, too, TD is in some ways underrated or at least forgotten, but they were both incredible players. I think Garnett at his peak might have been better, but Duncan was a bit more consistent.

[D.J.]

Duncan was more consistent, the better post defender, and was more clutch. KG would have had more success with more help, but he wasn't clutch at all minus game 7 against Sacramento. Duncan regularly made key defensive stops and after all, three Finals MVPs don't lie.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Duncan was a better post player and scorer, a better shot blocker and post defender and about equal as a passer and rebounder. KG is the better shooter and his perimeter defense is better, but overall, Duncan is the better offensive player, I'd also take Duncan's defensive impact over KG's and he's more clutch than Garnett.

Duncan was definitely better than Garnett.

[ginobli2311]

Duncan was a better post player and scorer, a better shot blocker and post defender and about equal as a passer and rebounder. KG is the better shooter and his perimeter defense is better, but overall, Duncan is the better offensive player, I'd also take Duncan's defensive impact over KG's and he's more clutch than Garnett.

Duncan was definitely better than Garnett.

This.

I'm a bigger fan of KG, but its not just titles that separate them. That is nonsense.

Agree with everything....although i think KG was the better passer. Not by a ton, but i think there is a gap there.

[Anaximandro1]

Use any criteria you like,but the Duncan

[rmt]

To answer OP - success. Playing with a better team and with HoF coach entire career helps, a lot. When post-prime KG joined good team, suddenly he was doing better than Duncan's Spurs. In the end its a team sport, one player can only get you so far.

I still see myth about KG disappearance in the clutch, despite the fact his clutch data is very similar to Duncan's:

http://elgee35.wordpress.com/2011/01/10/the-nbas-best-players-in-the-clutch-since-2003/

"And, with regards to his chief rival, Tim Duncan, KG’s clutch performance is quite similar. He’s nearly identical with TD over the last 8+ seasons, and outperformed him in his 3-year peak. Garnett actually shot it 21% more in his three-year peak (18.0 FGA’s per 36, 618 minute sample) than Duncan did in his (14.9 FGA’s per 36, 473 minute sample)."

Popovich coached a total of 64 NBA games (17-47 record) before Duncan joined the Spurs. It's Tim Duncan who made Popovich a HOF coach - not the other way around.

It is an unfair comparison (to Duncan) to be using stats from 03-04 which exclude his 2 MVP years and 2 championships (2 Finals MVPs). You're excluding 6 All-NBA 1st team years.


Duncan was a better post player and scorer, a better shot blocker and post defender and about equal as a passer and rebounder. KG is the better shooter and his perimeter defense is better, but overall, Duncan is the better offensive player, I'd also take Duncan's defensive impact over KG's and he's more clutch than Garnett.

Duncan was definitely better than Garnett.

Agreed. Here's the opinion of someone who played with both of them for years:

Reporters question:

You played alongside the best two PFs of the last 15 years Tim Duncan and Kevin Garnett who both won an MVP award and a championship ring. Who made a bigger impression on you?

Rasho:

I have to say Duncan. He is a true team leader. Garnett is a phenomenal player with great physical abilities but I don't think he is mentally strong enough to be a team leader. If he would have stayed in Minessota I don't think he would ever win a ring. He did the right move by going to Boston because there is Paul Pierce who is a true team leader that scores in clutch moments.

Link(in Slovenian): http://www.rtvslo.si/sport/kosarka/r...entance/231773

[D.J.]

Popovich coached a total of 64 NBA games (17-47 record) before Duncan joined the Spurs. It's Tim Duncan who made Popovich a HOF coach - not the other way around.


:roll: Popovich took over in 1996-97. Duncan wasn't there and Robinson was done for the year after six games. They had NO ONE. It didn't matter who coached them. They were going to suck regardless.

[ginobli2311]

Popovich coached a total of 64 NBA games (17-47 record) before Duncan joined the Spurs. It's Tim Duncan who made Popovich a HOF coach - not the other way around.

It is an unfair comparison (to Duncan) to be using stats from 03-04 which exclude his 2 MVP years and 2 championships (2 Finals MVPs). He was All-NBA 1st team for his first 7 years so you're excluding 5 All-NBA 1st team years.



Agreed. Here's the opinion of someone who played with both of them for years:

Reporters question:

You played alongside the best two PFs of the last 15 years Tim Duncan and Kevin Garnett who both won an MVP award and a championship ring. Who made a bigger impression on you?

Rasho:

I have to say Duncan. He is a true team leader. Garnett is a phenomenal player with great physical abilities but I don't think he is mentally strong enough to be a team leader. If he would have stayed in Minessota I don't think he would ever win a ring. He did the right move by going to Boston because there is Paul Pierce who is a true team leader that scores in clutch moments.

Link(in Slovenian): http://www.rtvslo.si/sport/kosarka/r...entance/231773

the quote by rasho is meaningless.

[rmt]

the quote by rasho is meaningless.

OK - I tend to value the opinion of someone who saw them both day after day in practice, locker room, huddles, games, playoff situations, etc. than those of message board posters or media.

BTW, I edited the post about the clutch stats - excluding 6 of TD's All-NBA 1st team years.

[ginobli2311]

OK - I tend to value the opinion of someone who saw them both day after day in practice, locker room, huddles, games, playoff situations, etc. than those of message board posters or media.

BTW, I edited the post about the clutch stats - excluding 6 of TD's All-NBA 1st team years.

it would have value if it was more than one person. maybe there are other quotes.

but it could easily be a personal bias from rasho and that could be why he said that.

look, i'm taking duncan as well. but KG was a hell of a leader in boston since he's been there and remained loyal to his franchise even when times got tough. he never through his franchise or team under the bus.

the clutch stuff? its actually a little bit of a myth....they actually performed very similar. i try and look up the information.

the main/important differences were duncan's superior interior defense and offense post play.

[rmt]

it would have value if it was more than one person. maybe there are other quotes.

but it could easily be a personal bias from rasho and that could be why he said that.

look, i'm taking duncan as well. but KG was a hell of a leader in boston since he's been there and remained loyal to his franchise even when times got tough. he never through his franchise or team under the bus.

the clutch stuff? its actually a little bit of a myth....they actually performed very similar. i try and look up the information.

the main/important differences were duncan's superior interior defense and offense post play.
Agreed with the interior defense and post offense.

I think that Rasho's the only player who has played with both of them.

[SCdac]

Agreed with the interior defense and post offense.

I think that Rasho's the only player who has played with both of them.

He's the only one I think to play a significant amount with both of them, while all three of them were still in their physical prime. Michael Finley played with both of them as well, albeit with '06-'10 Duncan and '10 Garnett only... Now that I think about it, Finley played with Duncan, Garnett, Dirk Nowitzki, and Charles Barkley his rookie year! lucky dude

[veilside23]

what makes tim duncan better.. you guys. the fans. seriously. nothing else.

lol a ginobili being a bigger garnett fan :D

kg is still playing better and will be playing better for 2 or 3 years more.

[whoartthou]

im an equal fan of both KG and Duncan.

THe only reason imo duncan > Kg is because of his accomplishments.

[JGXEN]

No mentions about what an incredible team defender KG is? TD>KG At interior D. KG>TD at perimeter D. KG is better or equal to TD at team defense.

[ILLsmak]

I'd take KG as my PF. Duncan as my C... when comparing them, although not exactly a fair comparison... I think Duncan is slightly better. But not nearly as much as people would say.

-Smak

[AlphaWolf24]

Duncan elevated his team and won more....KG had plenty of Chances and didn't.

Give me Duncan

[ballerz]

Duncan elevated his team and won more....KG had plenty of Chances and didn't.

Give me Duncan
KG had plenty of chances? entire time he was at minny didn't have a legit 2nd option

[whoartthou]

Duncan elevated his team and won more....KG had plenty of Chances and didn't.

Give me Duncan
http://i52.tinypic.com/xaynh1.jpg

[SCdac]

here's their H2H numbers btw:

The most points Duncan has dropped on the Wolves was 36 points, 20 rebounds, 7 assists in a 2004 loss...

The most points Garnett has scored against SA was 34 points, 10 rebounds, 8 assists in a 2003 win.

definitely two of the greatest PF's of the 2000's... league won't be the same once they're gone.

Duncan: 22-16 (38.1 mpg)

20.1 PPG (46.1 FG%)
12.1 RPG (3.4 offensive)
3.3 APG
1.9 BPG
0.5 SPG
7 FTA pg (62.6 FT%)
2.6 TO pg
2.4 PF pg

Garnett: 16-22 (38.6 mpg)

20.8 PPG (45.3 FG%)
11.2 RPG (2.6 offensive)
4.3 APG
2.1 BPG
5 FTA pg (77.5 FT%)
3.1 TO pg
3.3 PF pg

http://cdn.bleacherreport.net/images_root/slides/photos/000/476/386/51920861_display_image.jpg

[SCdac]

^ thats not counting the post season matchups though, like 2001

[rmt]

KG had plenty of chances? entire time he was at minny didn't have a legit 2nd option

A lot of people call KG loyal for sticking it out in Minny. Was it loyalty or was it money (more years and more % increase)?

KG's career salary - $270,115,354
TD's career salary - $183,544,536

KG played 2 years more and has earned $86,570,818 more (I know he wasn't bound by the new CBA). Now $86.5m is a lot of money and I don't blame players for making as much money as they can but it was his choice to stay in Minny after his rookie contract. He shouldn't get a pass for the choices he makes.

He should have taken less and gone to another team that gave him a better chance to win. TD explored Orlando after his rookie contract and would have left if SA didn't show signs that they were serious about putting a contending team around him (as before building the new AT&T Center).

How much money does one need (this isn't even including endorsements)? I guess when you're young, you have to think about the money and not winning. OTOH, TD knew a new bargaining agreement was coming and could have joined the NBA a lot earlier and bypassed it. Instead he stayed the 4 years, came out of college NBA-ready, earned a lot less but maybe was more mature/ready to lead a team to a championship.

[ballerz]

A lot of people call KG loyal for sticking it out in Minny. Was it loyalty or was it money (more years and more % increase)?

KG's career salary - $270,115,354
TD's career salary - $183,544,536

KG played 2 years more and has earned $86,570,818 more (I know he wasn't bound by the new CBA). Now $86.5m is a lot of money and I don't blame players for making as much money as they can but it was his choice to stay in Minny after his rookie contract. He shouldn't get a pass for the choices he makes.

He should have taken less and gone to another team that gave him a better chance to win. TD explored Orlando after his rookie contract and would have left if SA didn't show signs that they were serious about putting a contending team around him (as before building the new AT&T Center).

How much money does one need (this isn't even including endorsements)? I guess when you're young, you have to think about the money and not winning. OTOH, TD knew a new bargaining agreement was coming and could have joined the NBA a lot earlier and bypassed it. Instead he stayed the 4 years, came out of college NBA-ready, earned a lot less but maybe was more mature/ready to lead a team to a championship.
i wasn't talking about loyalty. All the time KG was there the didn't put decent players around him, if he had walked from the timberwolves in 03 to a proper contender he could have multiple rings

[Harison]

quick points

who was this hof coach that duncan played for?

duncan's coachability and stellar play throughout his career is what made popovich a hof coach

what was his winning % as head coach before duncan?

stop implying that pop was already a legendary coach when duncan got drafted.
Are you implying Pop isnt an All-time great coach? :oldlol: He havent coached in NBA before Spurs, so no, nobody is saying he was "already a legendary coach", thats preposterous. He is legendary because of his coaching. Did Duncan helped him to gain recognition? Of course he did. Didnt Phil benefited from prime Shaq, Kobe, and a GOAT, no less? Didnt Duncan/Jordan/etc. benefited from HoF coaches? Of course they did. Its two way street.

And while you entranced by the Duncan and want to disregard what Pop is doing, lets take for example this season. Duncan is on a free-fall decline, yet Spurs are having one of the best seasons of their franchise, still dont want to acknowledge Pop?



the year kg had a real team of players.....he played out of his mind in the playoffs....but no ring.....
The first time KG got a quality teammates, he instantly won it all. I guess you're implying that Minny had a "real team", they never did. Or lets take it from an another angle, the worst team Duncan had was better than the best team KG had in Minny :oldlol:

[Harison]

Popovich coached a total of 64 NBA games (17-47 record) before Duncan joined the Spurs. It's Tim Duncan who made Popovich a HOF coach - not the other way around.
Look at the post above, its a two way street, Pop benefited from Duncan, and Duncan benefited from Pop. Same with all All-time great coaches and players.



It is an unfair comparison (to Duncan) to be using stats from 03-04 which exclude his 2 MVP years and 2 championships (2 Finals MVPs). You're excluding 6 All-NBA 1st team years.
You misread it, that comparison included both 8+ years primes and 3 years peaks, respectively when peak happened to those players.



Rasho:

I have to say Duncan. He is a true team leader. Garnett is a phenomenal player with great physical abilities but I don't think he is mentally strong enough to be a team leader. If he would have stayed in Minessota I don't think he would ever win a ring. He did the right move by going to Boston because there is Paul Pierce who is a true team leader that scores in clutch moments.

What one players opinion who has an axe to grind has anything to do with a fair evaluation? Dont we have another front page thread with Jordan's teammate saying how Kobe is better than Jordan himself? :rolleyes: Rasho was soft so Garnett had an issue with him, and when Spurs got this "promising big", suddenly it appeared if Rasho was any decent its because KG spoonfed him in Minny.

[westsideozzie]

Duncan. The reason being KG was too light to bang in the post and fight with the more dominant big men. KG is a bully.

[MELOgamaniac]

The first time KG got a quality teammates, he instantly won it all. I guess you're implying that Minny had a "real team", they never did. Or lets take it from an another angle, the worst team Duncan had was better than the best team KG had in Minny :oldlol:


Thank you KG has had the sorriest teams ever....KG is > Duncan..duncan just had the better organization( coach, teamates, staff) ...if you look in spurs and timberwolves history
Minnesota has only been relevant in KG years...and since then are nothing and will continue that way for a long time..the Spurs ont he other hand were a franchise be4 duncan.

KG better talent than duncan...people just view duncans rings and more favorable personality over KG so they say he is better :facepalm

[westsideozzie]

Minnesota was irrelevant because while Duncan was banging in the post, KG was doing his best Chris Bosh impersonation.

[Gotterdammerung]

Let's look at this from a different angle than pure basketball skills.

Character wise, they're similar: utterly selfless, thoroughly competitive, authentic as a teammate.

But the difference is basketball IQ: Duncan figured out how to really focus his intensity and save his best performances for when they counted the most. He learned what Kevin Garnett never did: the difference between a regular season game in December and a do-or-die playoff game. In other words, Duncan developed a switch: whether he had to get 20 boards in order to win the game, or take over during crunch time.

Other guys with the same switch?
Bill Russell.
Larry Bird.
Michael Jordan.
Kevin Garnett? He never had it. He went full-bore the entire game, every game. Wore down at the wrong game, and/or the most important stretch of a game.

[Bigsmoke]

questionable...

Duncan was a better shot blocker though

[Bigsmoke]

Duncan was a better post player and scorer, a better shot blocker and post defender and about equal as a passer and rebounder. KG is the better shooter and his perimeter defense is better, but overall, Duncan is the better offensive player, I'd also take Duncan's defensive impact over KG's and he's more clutch than Garnett.

Duncan was definitely better than Garnett.

^this

[KGMN]

Duncan achieved more. Simple.
Achieving more doesn't matter at all (at least how you said it). Mark Madsen himself won two championships. Does that make him better than K.G.?

[Eat Like A Bosh]

Actually Kevin Garnett and Tim Duncan are both great players, Hard to tell which one was better. Duncan might have a slight more consistency and shot blocking, but Kevin Garnett was more versatile and was capable of being point forward in Minny.
In terms of impact, they are both extremely close. The Spurs just happened to have better management, and a great coach, that built a great team around Duncan. Therefore Duncan had more success throughout his career.
Not Kevin Garnett's fault that he got stuck in shitty Minnesota T-wolves, the 2nd best player was Sam Cassell ffs.

Right now most people would rank Duncan over Kevin Garnett because of the rings. I guess I have to agree, because winning is major in ranking players. So I would give the slight edge to Duncan.

But in terms of impact on a team, they are both extremely close, and if they both had the same amount of rings, it really could go either way.

And this:

Practically speaking it might very well have been just the organization and the coaching system fit for Duncan much more naturally from the start. But when you factor in luck to the NBA equation of "who's a better player", then your opening up not just a whole new chapter, but a whole new encyclopedia on what ifs and should have been's.

Nothing really separates them from a hypothetical standpoint. There both incredible and there skillsets are very close. Career wise both have similar stats. Duncan has a slightly higher PPG and more rebounds, but Garnett's passing skills have been one of his elite traits for his entire career. One is more vocal while the other lets his play do more of the talking.

What ultimately puts Duncan higher on the list is his accolades: rings, final mvp's, # of play-off games, etc. All that can be put on paper and is factual.

When you have two players at the same position. Both were among the top of the game for a consistent # of years. Both had amazing primes. Both sustained eliteness for a very long time. What makes one better than the other has to be success, and simply put Duncan has had more success.
:applause:

[Disaprine]

The only thing that makes Tim Duncan better than KG is his accomplishments.

[XxSMSxX]

Or lets take it from an another angle, the worst team Duncan had was better than the best team KG had in Minny

This right here, Yall bring up this same comparison every few days and i see the same idiots saying KG never stepped up in a big game/ is not clutch. Which is the biggest lie i see on ISH. This guy has made countless defensive stops/ clutch buckets to lift his team.

As for who's better, it's FAR to close to for me (or anyone for that matter) to outright say Duncan or Garnett is better.

[get these NETS]

Are you implying Pop isnt an All-time great coach? :oldlol: He havent coached in NBA before Spurs, so no, nobody is saying he was "already a legendary coach", thats preposterous. He is legendary because of his coaching. Did Duncan helped him to gain recognition? Of course he did. Didnt Phil benefited from prime Shaq, Kobe, and a GOAT, no less? Didnt Duncan/Jordan/etc. benefited from HoF coaches? Of course they did. Its two way street.

And while you entranced by the Duncan and want to disregard what Pop is doing, lets take for example this season. Duncan is on a free-fall decline, yet Spurs are having one of the best seasons of their franchise, still dont want to acknowledge Pop?


The first time KG got a quality teammates, he instantly won it all. I guess you're implying that Minny had a "real team", they never did. Or lets take it from an another angle, the worst team Duncan had was better than the best team KG had in Minny :oldlol:



Duncan's demeanor, attitude, skill level, high ball iq is what allowed the Spurs to have the highest winning % of any team in sports .....sports..the past 10 years.

Pop isn't just rolling the balls out, but without a singularly talented and coachable all time great player, who knows how good of a coach he actually is?


Spurs have drafted exceptionally well and done a good job of bringing in other players.....and their great reg. season record this year with an "on his last legs" Duncan reflects these things...


Pop is good, but it appears that Duncan would have at least had the same individual success had he gone elsewhere, but name another player that could have replaced him and had anyone calling pop a hall of fame coach, all these years later.
========

and by win it all...what do you mean....like in a charlie sheen way...because the wolves didn't even make the finals that year.

[XxSMSxX]

Duncan's demeanor, attitude, skill level, high ball iq is what allowed the Spurs to have the highest winning % of any team in sports .....sports..the past 10 years.

Pop isn't just rolling the balls out, but without a singularly talented and coachable all time great player, who knows how good of a coach he actually is?


Spurs have drafted exceptionally well and done a good job of bringing in other players.....and their great reg. season record this year with an "on his last legs" Duncan reflects these things...


Pop is good, but it appears that Duncan would have at least had the same individual success had he gone elsewhere, but name another player that could have replaced him and had anyone calling pop a hall of fame coach, all these years later.
========

and by win it all...what do you mean....like in a charlie sheen way...because the wolves didn't even make the finals that year.

You basically just said a whole bunch of hypotheticals one after another. YOU have no idea how Duncan would fair had he been drafted to say the Wolves instead of the Spurs. and no one has any idea how any other player would fair in Duncan situation, at least not down to a T.

[get these NETS]

You basically just said a whole bunch of hypotheticals one after another. YOU have no idea how Duncan would fair had he been drafted to say the Wolves instead of the Spurs. and no one has any idea how any other player would fair in Duncan situation, at least not down to a T.

I think with the alltime greats.....their skills, willpower and dedication to the game......gives strong indication that they would have adapted and succeeded in alternate scenarios.

[Pointguard]

I have Duncan as being better but much of it is that Duncan was just in a better situation. Coaches never maximized KG's ability and weren't close to it. Duncan game into a great situation, with great coaches, mentors and an organization with a defensive plan to get rings. KG came into a situation where managment had penalties the league never seen before and they couldn't build at all because of it, lost money to attract free agents, had no direction at all, wasn't offensive or defensive minded, KG was self taught and had to find his way to be a trailblazer with his unique ability. In a better organization I have no doubt in my mind KG is better. But hey it didn't happen that way.

KG and Duncan are the same age. In head to head competition KG even out blocks Timmy D because Minny allowed him to go one on one with him as opposed to being the defense for the entire team. Wow, when you think about it. Because that is the area everybody gives TD without much thought. But KG was more versatile than any big man ever and could have played bigger than he did but got caught up being spread too thin because his talents were so vast and the organization had no direction.

Rebounding was not equal in any sort of way. KG outrebounded TD all but one year in their prime and has three or four rebound titles. The amazing thing about that is that KG didn't play underneath the basket like TD did. KG could out rebound Duncan while guarding small forwards and setting up the offense. That only gets done when you are definitively a superior rebounder. And if you saw it, you wouldn't even question it. KG was covering way more court offensively and defensively and still outrebounding Duncan.

Passing??? KG was a much better passer within a less structured system with a lack of finishers, shooters and players. Seriously? I think waaay too many of yall are just looking at stats. It wasn't close.

The first time KG gets a real system of playing with players he excels in ways he couldn't when he was in his prime. In one year defensively we see a team among the best ever. TD had 11 years with a great organization and other great defensive players yet the first year KG gets on a team with just a great defensive scheme (he still didn't have the players or chance to build) the team is considered among the best. I also give KG the edge defensively because he communicates to the whole team and they can shift and make adjustments. One on one defense will be considered archaic at some point.

TD was better in the post (team priorities, kept KG more oriented to being at the elbows where he can be a set up man) but TD was great in the post and should get recognition for it. TD was a better post defender as well. TD had some intangible that was crazy to me that I can't even identify. Maybe he knows some basketball Gods but he was frequently in a great place at the right time. I have him 6th in my GOAT list because he's done a lot with a little.

[crosso√er]

At their prime; I'd take Duncan.
He is a better anchor defensively; Garnett is a more versatile defender but Duncan's size and length makes him a prototypical player to build your defense around; he has been the foundation of Spurs team defense. His length and defensive intangibles is 2nd to none. He is really good at defending while not fouling as well.

The main reason I'd take Duncan is because unlike Garnett he does take over games in the 4th and has been one of the most underrated clutch big man in the last ten years. He is also more versatile offensively; he has great foot work around the rim and can pull up for a jumper. Garnett relied too much on his jump shot. KG also, many times, seemed too passive in the 4th for my liking.

I definitely wouldn't feel any less confident if I had Garnett instead of Duncan on my team; both are top five PF's of All-Time. And I think Garnett is a more suitable PF to have if you have a low-post center. Passing wise; it's a toss-up with a slight edge to Garnett. Rebounding wise, it's really close. Scoring wise; slight edge to Duncan. Defensively, slight edge to Duncan.

If they both had no rings; I think it'll be 50/50. But since Duncan is a more accomplished winner, he automatically jumps ten to fifteen spots higher then Garnett is on an all-time scale.

[Pointguard]

Reporters question:

You played alongside the best two PFs of the last 15 years Tim Duncan and Kevin Garnett who both won an MVP award and a championship ring. Who made a bigger impression on you?

Rasho:

I have to say Duncan. He is a true team leader. Garnett is a phenomenal player with great physical abilities but I don't think he is mentally strong enough to be a team leader. If he would have stayed in Minessota I don't think he would ever win a ring. He did the right move by going to Boston because there is Paul Pierce who is a true team leader that scores in clutch moments.

Link(in Slovenian): http://www.rtvslo.si/sport/kosarka/r...entance/231773

Did you see Rasho play with both players? Rasho didn't like KG getting after him and probaly liked TD letting him play himself himself into being a nobody in the league. Rasho really impressed in Minny because he needs a player getting after him. SA, having a vastly superior organization, stold Rasho from Minny thru free agency, remind you Minny didn't have good players. The Spurs overpaid Rasho thinking they were going to get the KG version. When Rasho got SA they were amazed at how good KG made him look and were greatly disappointed in his play. They figured he was hitting his prime yet he became a much worse player with TD.

I guess you didn't know that - but the other side of that story, tells a better story and lets you see the motivation for such comments. Things are not all what you hear - and certainly not from a bitter scrub.

[SCdac]

people here are acting like Duncan was just "placed" on one of the greatest teams of all time as a rookie... hardly accurate... he MADE those teams what they were.

I mean look at his 2001 team:

Robinson - 35 years old , 14 PPG, 9 RPG
D. Anderson - 26, was pretty much a shooter and that's it, his career sucked
Daniels - 9 PPG , 26 MPG
Elliott - 35 years old, 8 PPG
Rose - 7 PPG, 21 MPG
Porter - 37 years old, 7 PPG
Ferry - 34 years old, 6 PPG
Johnson - 35 years old, 6 PPG
Walker - 5 PPG, 15 MPG
Kerr - 35 years old, 3 PPG

Duncan took THAT team to 58 wins , and I'm sorry but that team is HARDLY the cream of the crop... TD averaged 22.2 points a game for one of the slowest pace teams in the league (only averaged 96 PPG).

That same team nearly SWEPT Garnett's team in the first round of the playoffs.... with Duncan leading Spurs in scoring in every game but the loss.

[Pointguard]

Let's look at this from a different angle than pure basketball skills.

Character wise, they're similar: utterly selfless, thoroughly competitive, authentic as a teammate.

But the difference is basketball IQ: Duncan figured out how to really focus his intensity and save his best performances for when they counted the most. He learned what Kevin Garnett never did: the difference between a regular season game in December and a do-or-die playoff game. In other words, Duncan developed a switch: whether he had to get 20 boards in order to win the game, or take over during crunch time.

Other guys with the same switch?
Bill Russell.
Larry Bird.
Michael Jordan.
Kevin Garnett? He never had it. He went full-bore the entire game, every game. Wore down at the wrong game, and/or the most important stretch of a game.

Hey Got, don't see you around much but always a pleasure. I don't agree here, tho.

When KG was playing semi point powerforward for Minny he was making a ton of right decisions that coached and guided inferior players to baskets they couldn't get on their own. On defense, there might have never been a player that makes more right decisions and commitments than KG. Some of it is his ability to commit quicker. His call out for traps is based on how good Pierce and Ray Allen can vertically move left or right and the scouting report on the penetrator. KG factors in distance speed and commits better than any big man in the game. True he isn't as gong ho energy wise as his younger days, but I don't doubt that he would have been that much different in a great system back then.

KG became my favorite player because he always combined Passion and quick precise decision making. Most people think the two compromise each other. If KG was in a great situation I believe we see it at its highest levels. In coaching peak performance we love guys like KG that reflect loyalty, intensity, strong commitment with quick, right decision making, great passion and smart recall. With KG, his loyalty was in the way of the other qualities to succeed at a high level.

[SCdac]

Rebounding was not equal in any sort of way. KG outrebounded TD all but one year in their prime and has three or four rebound titles. The amazing thing about that is that KG didn't play underneath the basket like TD did. KG could out rebound Duncan while guarding small forwards and setting up the offense. That only gets done when you are definitively a superior rebounder. And if you saw it, you wouldn't even question it. KG was covering way more court offensively and defensively and still outrebounding Duncan.


I think you're vastly underrating Duncan's rebounding skills - hell even in H2H matchups Duncan rebounded more than KG (see one of my posts on the last page). His career rebounding average is better - he's averaged about 10 rebounds a game in nearly every season of his career... KG on the other hand didn't do that his first 3 seasons, and hasn't done it in his last 3 seasons.... Duncan averaged at least 3 offensive boards his first 8 seasons (basically 9 seasons), while KG has only done that 5 times.

[Pointguard]

people here are acting like Duncan was just "placed" on one of the greatest teams of all time as a rookie... hardly accurate... he MADE those teams what they were.

I mean look at his 2001 team:

Robinson - 35 years old , 14 PPG, 9 RPG
D. Anderson - 26, was pretty much a shooter and that's it, his career sucked
Daniels - 9 PPG , 26 MPG
Elliott - 35 years old, 8 PPG
Rose - 7 PPG, 21 MPG
Porter - 37 years old, 7 PPG
Ferry - 34 years old, 6 PPG
Johnson - 35 years old, 6 PPG
Walker - 5 PPG, 15 MPG
Kerr - 35 years old, 3 PPG

Duncan took THAT team to 58 wins , and I'm sorry but that team is HARDLY the cream of the crop... TD averaged 22.2 points a game for one of the slowest pace teams in the league (only averaged 96 PPG).

That same team nearly SWEPT Garnett's team in the first round of the playoffs.... with Duncan leading Spurs in scoring in every game but the loss.
One, that is a cagey wise team where everybody knows their role and the coach is on top of controlling pace to make sure the team is can maximize their experience, skills and role playing. KG and TD played to stand still that series. The difference was the other players. Antonio Daniels practically played Terrell Brandon to a draw which was Minny's lone saving grace outside of the KG. Minny didn't play good defense outside of KG. Had no role players. Shooting guard was a tweener in Peeler that scored less than 9ppg. Horrible bench. Wally was timid. Outside of KG nobody else averaged more than 5 rebounds a game. Minny's had no strengths outside of KG. Robinson was light years better than Rasho....

[Pointguard]

I think you're vastly underrating Duncan's rebounding skills - hell even in H2H matchups Duncan rebounded more than KG (see one of my posts on the last page). His career rebounding average is better - he's averaged about 10 rebounds a game in nearly every season of his career... KG on the other hand didn't do that his first 3 seasons, and hasn't done it in his last 3 seasons.... Duncan averaged at least 3 offensive boards his first 8 seasons (basically 9 seasons), while KG has only done that 5 times.

Read what I wrote. In their primes KG outrebounded TD every year, minus one, while not playing under the rim. It is only recently, when coaching in Boston took KG out of the rebounding equation did Duncan catch KG in h2h matchups. In their peaks KG is better year in and year out while being out of position. Its just a matter of team priorities in the other years that Duncan has the lead. Duncan is an outstanding rebounder.

[ProfessorMurder]

Tim Duncan is/was a better scorer, blocker, passer, versatile offensive and defensive player than KG.

I don't judge soley on chips.

:oldlol: KG might be the most versatile big man of all time. He's definitely the better passer.

Just so you know, KG has scored more, rebounded more, assisted more, and stolen more than Duncan through his career.

People always act like Duncan is leagues ahead of KG, but it is much closer than people think.

[SCdac]

:oldlol: KG might be the most versatile big man of all time. He's definitely the better passer.

Just so you know, KG has scored more, rebounded more, assisted more, and stolen more than Duncan through his career.

People always act like Duncan is leagues ahead of KG, but it is much closer than people think.

He's also played more than nearly 6,000 regular season minutes on, admittedly, worse teams.

Yet he's played less playoff games especially early in his career (ie. his seasons were shorter), by the end of 2004 (his sixth season) Duncan had already played a full season's worth of post-season games, while KG and his team could never get out of the first round. That's taxing on the body, when combined with Team USA games.

Duncan in the playoffs has scored more, rebounded more, assisted more, and blocked more shots than Garnett through his career. Duncan holds the record for most blocks in a Finals series (in 03), Garnett even in his DPOY year hasn't beaten that.

[SCdac]

Read what I wrote. In their primes KG outrebounded TD every year, minus one, while not playing under the rim. It is only recently, when coaching in Boston took KG out of the rebounding equation did Duncan catch KG in h2h matchups. In their peaks KG is better year in and year out while being out of position. Its just a matter of team priorities in the other years that Duncan has the lead. Duncan is an outstanding rebounder.

Let me ask you this, outside of their prime years, who do you think is the better and/or more consistent rebounder? I don't remember the OP saying this thread was exclusively a comparison of "primes" is the reason I ask. Your career doesn't start and stop in your "best" seasons.

Duncan last season had a 27 and 26 rebound game and has had more 15+ rebound games this season than Garnett's has had the last few seasons combined, and KG hasn't had a 20 rebound game since 2008, and one more about a year before that. Despite playing less regular season games, Duncan leads Garnett in double-doubles and ranks 3rd all-time since 1986.

It's not all about stats, I'm just using them to get the point across Duncan is not behind Garnett much, if at all, in rebounding... Personally, I think he's better, judging career to career... (seeing as they were born at virtually the same time, and have faced each other over 40 times).

Kendrick Perkins - the guy Garnett in the last few has had to contend for rebounds with, is basically the kind of player Duncan has had to play with most of his career. In say 2005, Duncan played with two seven footers in Rasho and Mohammed, as well as Malik for some games, Horry, and Massenburg, while KG was playing with Trenton Hassell, Olowakandi and Griffin a couple of which couldn't stay healthy. Even Rasho was not a crazy rebounder for SA or MIN, but he was just DRob's replacement.

Basically I would change your untrue statement of "rebounding was not equal in any sort of way"... to "they were much more equal in rebounding, than anything".

Clearly both were excellent, top of the line rebounders, but I'd give it to Duncan for consistency, getting more offensive boards, and doing much of it alongside one of the best rebounders in David Robinson. But, like I said, it's not a landslide - and it's not all about primes; there were certainly games in the mid-2000's in which Duncan out-rebounded Garnett, and vice versa.

[Monkey D Dragon]

:facepalm Amazing how badly KG gets looked down here.

No Doubt Duncan had a better career No doubt about that But was Duncan better then KG as a lot of these youngens think? NO!

KG was a MONSTER Early 2000. Without a doubt Top 5 player with Shaq Kobe Duncan and AI for a long time.

The Big Difference is the style KG and Duncan plays.

KG was a Long Lankey versatile quick agil PF who can hit Mid to deep shots. Great post player from mid to close with great vision to kick it out avrg 5 assist as big and also one of the few to avrg 20/10/5. KG was also able to play 3 with decent handles for a big but the Domination was when KG face up on you from mid range and give you that triple treat. No one can stop him.

Duncan was Solid Big Tall blocky player who dominated the mid range with Amazing bank shot creating so much space at the same time having amazing footwork to be one of the best down low post player with great touch which makes him Perfect and Easy to Build around especially Ducan coming out of collage all ready and prepare for NBA level basketball and additional of Top level elite coaching him to a sick NBA career.

Both have great Defense but different style and I prefer Duncans style of defense for bigs

bottom line Individual talent wise I can easily say they are just about equal but the style Duncan plays makes it whole lot easier to build around which leads to success. Also when you have coach like PoP and a great Franchise who knows how to do there scouting job with great Leadership from Duncan with humble players with good chemistry = Championships

[Bernie Nips]

Take away rings and MVPs and look at their abilities? As good as each other easily.

How things turned out? Tim Duncan is higher on the GOAT list and that's undebatable. And KG is my favourite player. But I do think KG is as good as Duncan.

[Harison]

Let me ask you this, outside of their prime years, who do you think is the better and/or more consistent rebounder? I don't remember the OP saying this thread was exclusively a comparison of "primes" is the reason I ask. Your career doesn't start and stop in your "best" seasons.
Career comparisons frequently are apples to potatoes, thats why either one should understand its limits, or dont use career comparisons at all. One player is from the college, another from the high-school, same situation? No. Or one is still playing, another is retired, yet dishonest fans use career comparison non the less. Like some Duncan fans are claiming TD is better rebounder than Hakeem :rolleyes: TD is not better rebounder than Dream, nor better rebounder than KG.

[SCdac]

Career comparisons frequently are apples to potatoes, thats why either one should understand its limits, or dont use career comparisons at all. One player is from the college, another from the high-school, same situation? No. Or one is still playing, another is retired, yet dishonest fans use career comparison non the less. Like some Duncan fans are claiming TD is better rebounder than Hakeem :rolleyes: TD is not better rebounder than Dream, nor better rebounder than KG.

and your basing this off of? just your opinion? ... I've explained why I think Duncan is a better rebounder (note: better does not mean immensely better), why do you think Garnett is better? Consistency should hardly looked down upon, nor should coming into the league prepared be held against a player... Should averaging 14 rebounds per game in his first Finals series, as a 23 year old young man, be looked at as inferior because he went to college? That is sick! If anything being a fundamentally good rebounder, and better offensive rebounder, is a plus.

[Showtime]

Low post play on both ends.

[Anaximandro1]

KG and TD played to stand still that series.
Duncan dominated Garnett in 2001.In the Spurs' three victories over Wolves(Game 1,2 and 4)...


Duncan averaged 25 pts (47.6%),14 rb,2.3 blk,4 as

Garnett averaged 20.7 pts (45.5%),13.3 rb,1.6 blk,4.3 as


Read what I wrote. In their primes KG outrebounded TD every yearIt's very easy to use selective statistics...

Regular Season Stats



Duncan 11.4 rb

KG 10.8 rb

Playoff Stats



Duncan 12.4 rb

KG 11.2 rb

Playoffs

Peak Duncan


2002 Games 9 Total Rebounds 130

2003 Games 24 Total Rebounds 369

2002+2003 Games 33 Total Rebounds 499 Average 15.1 rb


Peak KG


2003 Games 6 Total Rebounds 94

2003 Games 18 Total Rebounds 263

2003+2004 Games 24 Total Rebounds 357 Average 14.8 rb


Big Difference : Duncan dominated WCSF,WCF and NBA Finals;KG dominated the FR and WCSF.


:oldlol: KG might be the most versatile big man of all time. He's definitely the better passer.

Just so you know, KG has scored more, rebounded more, assisted more, and stolen more than Duncan through his career.

People always act like Duncan is leagues ahead of KG, but it is much closer than people think.

Use any criteria you like

1) Regular Season Stats



Duncan 20.6 pts (50.7%),11.4 rb,2.3 blk,3.1 ast,FTA 6.8

KG 19.6 pts,(49.8%),10.8 rb,1.6 blk,4.1 ast,FTA 4.8

2) Playoff Stats



Duncan 23.0 pts,(50.2%),12.4 rb,2.6 blk,3.5 ast,FTA 8.5

KG 20.0 pts,(47.4%),11.2 rb,1.4 blk,4.0 ast,FTA 4.6

3) Ability to raise his game in big moments

Duncan vs Shaq&Kobe




1999-Western Conference Semifinals / Spurs 4-0 over Lakers

Duncan averaged 29 pts,10.8 rbs,3.3 as.,2 blk

Game 3 Duncan put 37/14/4/1

Game 4 Duncan put 33/14/4/1

2002-Western Conference Semifinals / Lakers 4-1 over Spurs

LA was the better team but Duncan averaged 29 pts,17.2 rb,4.6 as,3.2 blk

Game 4 Duncan put 30/11/6/4

Game 5 Duncan put 34/25/4/2

2003 Western Conference Semifinals / Spurs 4-2 over Lakers

Duncan averaged 28 pts,11.8 rb,4.8 as,1.3 blk

Game 4 36/9/5

Game 5 27/14/5/1

Game 6 37/16/4/2


Let's get real for once:KG wouldn't stand a chance against Shaq&Kobe.

[Harison]

and your basing this off of? just your opinion? ... I've explained why I think Duncan is a better rebounder (note: better does not mean immensely better), why do you think Garnett is better? Consistency should hardly looked down upon, nor should coming into the league prepared be held against a player... Should averaging 14 rebounds per game in his first Finals series, as a 23 year old young man, be looked at as inferior because he went to college? That is sick! If anything being a fundamentally good rebounder, and better offensive rebounder, is a plus.
As I said, you dont understand career comparison limitations. Same "logic" is used TD vs Dream, etc. When player comes to the league or retires from it, as well as team playstyle and teammates, all should be taken in consideration.

Btw, "better offensive rebounder" isnt a plus per se either, simply different players (or even team) focus. For example, to prevent high FG% fast break points KG immediately returns to the defense, this tactic is adopted by the Celtics now.

[FKAri]

Popovich elevated Duncan's game while KG had to figure everything out for hiself

This plus Duncan was a better go-to scorer than Garnett ever was.

[G-Funk]

Coach Pop

[Pointguard]

Let me ask you this, outside of their prime years, who do you think is the better and/or more consistent rebounder? I don't remember the OP saying this thread was exclusively a comparison of "primes" is the reason I ask. Your career doesn't start and stop in your "best" seasons.
In your prime use your best mind, your best body to do what you have to do. When you are past your prime you become more of a role player. When Duncan was at his rebounding best, he was not as good a rebounder as KG. Now when they get older and play out different roles and KG is told to emphasize other aspects of his game TD gets more rebounds. When he was at his best, he was getting out rebounded by KG. KG is outrebounding TD today. Heck Al Jefferson is getting more rebounds than they are. Is Al Jefferson a better rebounder than they are. Yes he is now but not in their primes.


Duncan last season had a 27 and 26 rebound game and has had more 15+ rebound games this season than Garnett's has had the last few seasons combined, and KG hasn't had a 20 rebound game since 2008, and one more about a year before that. Despite playing less regular season games, Duncan leads Garnett in double-doubles and ranks 3rd all-time since 1986.
KG's focus the last three years has been anchor defensively. Rebounding takes a back seat. Just not a priority in the scheme of things. Lamar Odom comes off the bench and isn't a rebounding machine. He may pass Duncan this year. Is he a better rebounder? Duncan at his best in rebounding was almost always looking up to KG.


It's not all about stats, I'm just using them to get the point across Duncan is not behind Garnett much, if at all, in rebounding... Personally, I think he's better, judging career to career... (seeing as they were born at virtually the same time, and have faced each other over 40 times).
I'm telling you don't look at the stats. KG could be set up man for his team and guarding small forwards and still getting more boards, 5 out of 6 years. If KG played straight up PF and underneath the basket the numbers aren't as close.


Clearly both were excellent, top of the line rebounders, but I'd give it to Duncan for consistency, getting more offensive boards, and doing much of it alongside one of the best rebounders in David Robinson. But, like I said, it's not a landslide - and it's not all about primes; there were certainly games in the mid-2000's in which Duncan out-rebounded Garnett, and vice versa.
Garnett had four rebound titles. Duncan has none. It isn't equal. And KG didn't play as close to the basket as Duncan did. KG's handicap of playing further away isn't an excuse. It just makes it more amazing he did it anyway.

[Pointguard]

Duncan dominated Garnett in 2001.In the Spurs' three victories over Wolves(Game 1,2 and 4)...



It's very easy to use selective statistics...

Regular Season Stats



Playoff Stats



Playoffs

Peak Duncan



Peak KG



Big Difference : Duncan dominated WCSF,WCF and NBA Finals;KG dominated the FR and WCSF.



Use any criteria you like

1) Regular Season Stats



2) Playoff Stats



3) Ability to raise his game in big moments

Duncan vs Shaq&Kobe



Let's get real for once:KG wouldn't stand a chance against Shaq&Kobe.
LOL, are you auditioning for the most ugly post with confusing intentions.

[rmt]

You misread it, that comparison included both 8+ years primes and 3 years peaks, respectively when peak happened to those players.

Sorry, but you misread it. All of this data is from the last 8 years (03-11), meaning that, that it does not include any data from 97-03 (6 of TD's All-NBA 1st team years).

The 3 year peaks (look at the actual box) referred to are TD (07-09) and KG (03-05). So according to these stats TD's 3 year peak (clutch data) from the years 03-11 happened in 07-09. Don't see why one would be using any data for comparison for TD for the years 07-09 - well past his MVP years.

[Harison]

Sorry, but you misread it. All of this data is from the last 8 years (03-11), meaning that, that it does not include any data from 97-03 (6 of TD's All-NBA 1st team years).

The 3 year peaks (look at the actual box) referred to are TD (07-09) and KG (03-05). So according to these stats TD's 3 year peak (clutch data) from the years 03-11 happened in 07-09. Don't see why one would be using any data for comparison for TD for the years 07-09 - well past his MVP years.
No advanced data available before '03, if you have it - share it with 82games.com. From '03 includes both players primes anyway, unless you imply Duncan was better in the clutch in his first seasons in NBA compared to mature version of Duncan in prime :pimp:

Why were chosen TD for the years 07-09 - its his best stats in the clutch, it doesnt have to be the same years as athletic peak. Like Kobe's clutch data, he was better these seasons compared to his prime, thats why picked '08-10 seasons clutch data.

If you prefer to use Duncan's clutch data for '03-05 or w/e, its your choice, problem is though, it will be worse than '07-09.

[Myth]

In what way was Duncan ever a better passer than KG?

KG may have better passing "skills," but Duncan was more likely to be in the low post passing out of double teams, making it so that there is somebody else open (Duncan's passes out of double teams are what usually started the ball swinging around the perimeter while the defense is trying to rotate). Garnett was more of a high post player than Duncan, so him giving up the ball was less likely to screw of defensive schemes.

[DirtyC]

I'll echo what someone said earlier in this thread in saying that some of you act like Duncan was just thrown onto a championship team.... Timmy was the ANCHOR for those championship teams. He was dominant in his prime, a few of you idiots forget or ignore that because he wasn't flashy with his dominance.

I'm a guy who HATED the spurs for a long time, even during their championship runs. I hated how boring they were and hated Manu, Horry, Bowen, and their general flopping as a team. But Duncan was automatic scoring in the post, and could board and body up against just about any big man on Earth (Shaq was tough, but prime Shaq is on another level).

I'm not a man who is about hypotheticals. And I don't go strictly by rings. But Duncan has consistently been the main focus on a team that has been a title contender for the past decade. KG hasn't. He wasn't even the best player on his team when he got his ring. Duncan was a better scorer and rebounder than KG. Defense it's equal for me, Timmy was better bodying up big men and KG is better pick and roll. And I've always thought TD had a much better basketball IQ. He always seemed to make the best decision possible and make it so effortlessly

[Harison]

KG may have better passing "skills," but Duncan was more likely to be in the low post passing out of double teams, making it so that there is somebody else open (Duncan's passes out of double teams are what usually started the ball swinging around the perimeter while the defense is trying to rotate). Garnett was more of a high post player than Duncan, so him giving up the ball was less likely to screw of defensive schemes.
You mean the best passers should be low-post players? Poor PGs :oldlol: In all seriousness, the better passer is the one who can run the offense, have great court vision, set-up and find an open man for easier points, and rarely makes mistakes. In all of these Garnett is better, hence he is a better passer.

An example: Rasho played with both KG and Duncan. In Minny he had 11.2 PPG with 52.5%, as soon as he joined Spurs he dropped to 8.7 PPG with 46.9%. Not to speak KG was the best playmaker in the Minny for some seasons, while Spurs had Parker.

[Warners0]

[QUOTE=Anaximandro1]Use any criteria you like,but the Duncan

[Harison]

I'm not a man who is about hypotheticals. And I don't go strictly by rings. But Duncan has consistently been the main focus on a team that has been a title contender for the past decade. KG hasn't. He wasn't even the best player on his team when he got his ring.
KG hate is getting ridiculous, first you hold against KG he was on a crappy team hence not on contender like Duncan, then you claim KG wasnt the best player on '08 Celtics :facepalm Clearly you havent watched KG in Minny, nor watched the Celtics, nor even looked up stats.

[Rocker09]

IMO both are equal talent wise...
TD has the better fundamentals but KG is a better athlete...

As a leader, TD usually lets his game do the talking
KG on the other hand is a very vocal leader...

[Gotterdammerung]

Hey Got, don't see you around much but always a pleasure. I don't agree here, tho.

When KG was playing semi point powerforward for Minny he was making a ton of right decisions that coached and guided inferior players to baskets they couldn't get on their own. On defense, there might have never been a player that makes more right decisions and commitments than KG. Some of it is his ability to commit quicker. His call out for traps is based on how good Pierce and Ray Allen can vertically move left or right and the scouting report on the penetrator. KG factors in distance speed and commits better than any big man in the game. True he isn't as gong ho energy wise as his younger days, but I don't doubt that he would have been that much different in a great system back then.

KG became my favorite player because he always combined Passion and quick precise decision making. Most people think the two compromise each other. If KG was in a great situation I believe we see it at its highest levels. In coaching peak performance we love guys like KG that reflect loyalty, intensity, strong commitment with quick, right decision making, great passion and smart recall. With KG, his loyalty was in the way of the other qualities to succeed at a high level.
Thanks for the kind words. I'm on my way out here, though. :facepalm

This is all correct and I agree KG is a great teammate. Said as much.

But none of that actually disconfirms what I said. KG has a bum rap because he didn't develop the switch early on. One point you could make is, he never had enough reps early on in his career to figure out how to step it up and perform in the clutch. Duncan did on those deep playoff runs in 98, 99, and the rest is history.

[Gotterdammerung]

==double posted==

[Anaximandro1]

[QUOTE= Gregg Popovich]
Duncan has more than talent. He also has the intangible qualities of leadership, exuding a quiet confidence that makes his teammates believe in him.

[Christofire]

-better post up
-better shot blocking
-more reliable in the clutch
-more consistent
-more heart


i'm a celtic fan and i always felt that K.G.s heart and passion were overrated because he always seem to show how smal his heart really was in big games. garnett has never been clutch. his passionate dameanor has built a facade of him being a big time clutch performer but her was never that

[Pointguard]

-better post up
-better shot blocking
-more reliable in the clutch
-more consistent
-more heart


i'm a celtic fan and i always felt that K.G.s heart and passion were overrated because he always seem to show how smal his heart really was in big games. garnett has never been clutch. his passionate dameanor has built a facade of him being a big time clutch performer but her was never that

Wow, you can't even tell who inspires your own team? The Laker series in which he went 27ppg 15 rebounds and 5 the year before he switched guard duties and had that other great series run. The Dallas series where he averaged 24 pts 18.7 rebounds and 5 assist. Do you know anything about the famous Sacramento series?

This is a game seven.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1VtZht_8t4&feature=related

[Myth]

You mean the best passers should be low-post players? Poor PGs :oldlol: In all seriousness, the better passer is the one who can run the offense, have great court vision, set-up and find an open man for easier points, and rarely makes mistakes. In all of these Garnett is better, hence he is a better passer.
.

I think Garnett has better passing "abilities," but Duncan was passing out of situations that sets his team up for easier baskets. Garnett playing closer to the perimeter does not open up shots for the real shooters on the team, but Duncan really sets his team up for an inside-outside offense, which is more effective. As for your condescending response suggesting my description suggests that posts players are better passers than PGs, you really are not thinking of what the overall offense would be. Yes, point guards are the best passers (usually) on a team, and it is more effective if the big men are down low, giving them space. If you have a good PG and a good passing big man down low, it is more effective then having a good PG and a good passing big man up high, because that just becomes redundant having all of your good passers up top rather than spread out.

[Round Mound]

Clutcher
Better Rebounder
Better Shot Blocker and Paint Defender
Better Scorer at Higher FG%

[M.Bustly15A5RU8]

Imagine if Kevin Garnett had Greg Popovich and the usual Spurs depth around him in his prime.

[M.Bustly15A5RU8]

Spurs would be even more dominant now with current Kevin Garnett instead of current Tim Duncan.

[RaininTwos]

Tim Duncan is/was a better scorer, blocker, passer, versatile offensive and defensive player than KG.

I don't judge soley on chips.
:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

[Pushxx]

Can't play what ifs. Tim Duncan is the GOAT PF because of how their careers panned out.

Would KG have achieved more in TD's situation or vice versa? We'll never know.

Just gotta respect them for being two once-in-a-lifetime legends.

[Cali Syndicate]

As players they're pretty synonymous with each other. Duncan definitely has had the better career though.

[Indian guy]

Despite what their ppg might say, Duncan was clearly the superior offensive player. You could run your entire offense through him for an entire game - he was that good in the post. KG was never that level of a go-to-guy. That's what differentiates them IMO - Duncan's superior scoring ability. He could dominate games consistently through his scoring. That's what being a superstar is all about - being able to dominate games by putting the ball in the hole. KG never possessed that ability.

[Pearleojam]

Tim Duncan is a leader, KG not.

[KKittles30]

Kevin Garnett Tim Duncan

pts. 24,270 22,558

reb. 13,313 12,533

asts. 5,065 3,428

stls. 1,664 822

blks. 1,908 2,469

ft% 79 68

fg% 49 50

[TheBigVeto]

Best PFs post 2000:

1. Tim Duncan (also GOAT PF)
2. Dirk Nowitzki
3. Kevin Garnett

That is the correct ranking.

[bizil]

Timmy's resume dictates he's the GOAT PF. In terms of peak value or who's flat out the better player it's damn close. These two reigned supreme as the two best PF's in L during a golden era of PF's. I think in terms of post play both on offense and defense, Tim has the edge. But other than that, KG was better than or equal to Timmy at everything else. U also have to keep in mind that they are two different players, just like how Barkley vs. Malone were two totally different players.

If u want a more traditional PF then u go Malone or Duncan. If u want a more versatile PF who also perform the traditional PF's duties great u go KG or Barkley. For me, I would take KG or Barkley over Malone or Duncan. But GOAT wise, Timmy and Malone are the two GOAT PF's ever as of now. When u compared Malone to Barkley, defense was the determining factor if u picked Malone over Barkley. In terms of Duncan over KG, it was because u liked the way Timmy could control the paint better. But Timmy had the size and skillset of a center. KG bodyframe and skillset wise was actually that of a SF. Even though KG was 7'0, he only weighed like 215-220 pounds. He weighed the same size as many SF's of that day.

[Artillery]

Timmy's resume dictates he's the GOAT PF. In terms of peak value or who's flat out the better player it's damn close. These two reigned supreme as the two best PF's in L during a golden era of PF's. I think in terms of post play both on offense and defense, Tim has the edge. But other than that, KG was better than or equal to Timmy at everything else. U also have to keep in mind that they are two different players, just like how Barkley vs. Malone were two totally different players.

If u want a more traditional PF then u go Malone or Duncan. If u want a more versatile PF who also perform the traditional PF's duties great u go KG or Barkley. For me, I would take KG or Barkley over Malone or Duncan. But GOAT wise, Timmy and Malone are the two GOAT PF's ever as of now. When u compared Malone to Barkley, defense was the determining factor if u picked Malone over Barkley. In terms of Duncan over KG, it was because u liked the way Timmy could control the paint better. But Timmy had the size and skillset of a center. KG bodyframe and skillset wise was actually that of a SF. Even though KG was 7'0, he only weighed like 215-220 pounds. He weighed the same size as many SF's of that day.

How is Duncan not versatile if he can perform equally well at PF or C? I'd say it's more important to have a power forward that can alternate the center position than one that can play small forward.

[Harison]

How is Duncan not versatile if he can perform equally well at PF or C? I'd say it's more important to have a power forward that can alternate the center position than one that can play small forward.

Duncan can play PF and C on elite level, skill-wise he is a center which played as PF for a part of his career.

Garnett can play all five positions, with SF/PF and C on elite level, both sides of the floor. Duncan is a better as a center (in his prime), but the difference isnt big. KG rarely played as C earlier, so there was a conception he cant be a good center with such thin frame, but this year once he was moved to this position, he was one of the best centers in NBA! As 36 years old, on the bad knees. He limited his opponents more than Chandler, Ibaka or even Dwight, anchoring Top1 defense, while averaging 20/10 himself.

Or we can take these Playoffs, which center is the best in NBA? Quite easily Garnett. Its remarkable. Therefore conception he couldnt be an elite C in his prime doesnt hold the water, if he is already one in his grandpa years.

[knicksman]

tim plays to win while garnett is a statpadder. Hes the tmac of big men. Hes a big man with an impact of a guard. Thats why hes a constant first round exit until he sacrificed stats in boston.

[sipitri]

What makes Duncan better than KG?

Their teams.

Swap their teams and we maybe would be talking about what makes KG better than Duncan.

[Collie]

The ability to raise their game when they need the most. Prime Duncan had an extra gear, KG was basically Pippen in a 7 foot body - he is an all time great PF, but he couldn't really will teams to success.

Duncan could.

[tontoz]

KG has always been a jump shooter. His shot selection is more like a shooting guard than a power forward.

[ralph_i_el]

We can only judge based on how they played.

From 99'-Present

1. Shaquille Rashuan O'neal

2. Timothy Theodore Duncan

3. Kobe Bean Bryant

:cheers:

[JellyBean]

It seems to be the consensus that Tim Duncan is better than Kevin Garnett. But what exactly makes him better? Do you think Tim Duncan could've led the Timberwolves farther than Kevin Garnett did?

Better teammates at the start of their careers, is the only thing that makes Duncan better than Kevin Garnett. And to answer the second question, I doubt it.

[Odinn]

Kevin Garnett Tim Duncan

pts. 24,270 22,558

reb. 13,313 12,533

asts. 5,065 3,428

stls. 1,664 822

blks. 1,908 2,469

ft% 79 68

fg% 49 50
Moses scored 27409 points in the NBA. He scored almost 30k points during his professional career. Grabbed almost 18k boards. Yet Duncan is greater than Moses.

Fail.

[Odinn]

The ability to raise their game when they need the most. Prime Duncan had an extra gear, KG was basically Pippen in a 7 foot body - he is an all time great PF, but he couldn't really will teams to success.

Duncan could.
This.

I have q for you Garnett-guys; while Duncan is one of the top 10 playoff performers ever, is Garnett even top 20 in that case?:facepalm (PS: not saying Garnett is a bad playoff-performer)

[D.J.]

Tim Duncan is a leader, KG not.


If he's not a leader, his presence wouldn't have been missed so much in the '09 playoffs.

[ProfessorMurder]

The ability to raise their game when they need the most. Prime Duncan had an extra gear, KG was basically Pippen in a 7 foot body - he is an all time great PF, but he couldn't really will teams to success.

Duncan could.

KG is always in 5th gear, Duncan plays in 3rd or 4th. It's tough to raise your game when you play every possession like it's your last.