What makes Kobe Bryant better than Kevin Garnett

[M.Bustly15A5RU8]

On most lists I see Kobe Bryant ranked above Kevin Garnett. But why? Just because of rings? Kevin Garnett played on the Timberwolves....

Kevin Garnett single handedly got the Timberwolves all the way to the Western Conference finals. He spent his peak years on that scrub franchise. Then a past his peak Kevin Garnett finally had some good players on his team and the same year wins the title. And he's arguably the best defensive player of the last decade and at almost 35 still makes his team one of the best defensive teams in the league.

I think that Kevin Garnett's impact > Kobe Bryant's impact.

[Colby Brian]

:roll: :roll:

[Marv_Albert]

:lol :lol :lol :lol

[DMAVS41]

On most lists I see Kobe Bryant ranked above Kevin Garnett. But why? Just because of rings? Kevin Garnett played on the Timberwolves....

Kevin Garnett single handedly got the Timberwolves all the way to the Western Conference finals. He spent his peak years on that scrub franchise. Then a past his peak Kevin Garnett finally had some good players on his team and the same year wins the title. And he's arguably the best defensive player of the last decade and at almost 35 still makes his team one of the best defensive teams in the league.

I think that Kevin Garnett's impact > Kobe Bryant's impact.

Phil Jackson and great teams.

Is what it is. Circumstances dictate how we rank players. We'll never know what KG's true potential was.

[LMFAO]

talent and skill other than that they are pretty much even.

[TennesseeFan]

cuz hes a better SG.

[LAClipsFan33]

Everything...

[ballerz]

Would of been good to see KG on a decent team in his prime

[Gevz2kX]

because he is more successful. But that is greatly due to the players he had on his team and his coach. If Kobe had Mark Madsen, Olowokandi, Troy Hudson and Ervin Johnson like Garnett did he wouldn't have been as successful. Same situation with Duncan

[LA_Showtime]

I buy what you're selling. Had KG played on a different, more successful team, then yeah, he might have ranked above Kobe/Duncan/Shaq. But hey, that didn't happen.

I should also point out that Kevin's had flaws that Duncan and Kobe have proven not to have, mainly being go to scorers and being clutch.

[Shih508]

I buy what you're selling. Had KG played on a different, more successful team, then yeah, he might have ranked above Kobe/Duncan/Shaq. But hey, that didn't happen.

I should also point out that Kevin's had flaws that Duncan and Kobe have proven not to have, mainly being go to scorers and being clutch.

Kobe ? Clutch?

[lilgodfather1]

Did anyone do a Shaq joke? If not I call it!

[ballup]

I buy what you're selling. Had KG played on a different, more successful team, then yeah, he might have ranked above Kobe/Duncan/Shaq. But hey, that didn't happen.

I should also point out that Kevin's had flaws that Duncan and Kobe have proven not to have, mainly being go to scorers and being clutch.
Is clutchness really a huge deciding factor?

[LA_Showtime]

Is clutchness really a huge deciding factor?

Uh, yeah. There were questions early in Garnett's career about whether he was even willing to take big shots. People said he shied away from the moment. Just go back and look at some of the articles people wrote about him.

I don't necessarily agree with the criticisms, but history shows Kobe and Duncan were better in those situations.

[Harison]

Uh, yeah. There were questions early in Garnett's career about whether he was even willing to take big shots. People said he shied away from the moment. Just go back and look at some of the articles people wrote about him.

I don't necessarily agree with the criticisms, but history shows Kobe and Duncan were better in those situations.
Thats a myth, sorry:

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

Garnett and Duncan

A criticism often volleyed toward Kevin Garnett is his reluctance to take over games down the stretch. Of course, most bigs are hampered by this. 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).
-------------

So no, Duncan is not more clutch than Garnett, nor more inclined to shoot more with game on the line. Series just ended with Grizzlies, how did Duncan do in the clutch? Disappeared. Garnett however was HUGE in the clutch vs Knicks, and even though his shot isnt falling vs Heat, he isnt shy either.

[Harison]

On the topic, Kobe is ranked higher because of better career. If we rank them purely as players, Kobe obviously was better scorer, while KG was better at pretty much everything else, and has bigger impact on the team.

[madmax]

Nothing....
KG is and was much better all-arround player than this glorified chucker from LA. Too bad hype and market dictates the way people perceive some things, therefore KG will never get a recognition he deserves because of the situation he was in early in his career.

[iamgine]

Basketball is always like that. MJ wasn't actually more impactful than Hakeem. Switch their team and Hakeem's the one ranked higher.

[DMAVS41]

[QUOTE=Harison]Thats a myth, sorry:

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

Garnett and Duncan

A criticism often volleyed toward Kevin Garnett is his reluctance to take over games down the stretch. Of course, most bigs are hampered by this. And, with regards to his chief rival, Tim Duncan, KG

[Odinn]

3 times NBA Champion
3 times Finals MVP
2 times NBA MVP

If KG's resume would be something like that, I'd rank him above Kobe.

All-time rankings about career achievments...

[G.O.A.T]

Kobe ? Clutch?

Yes idiot.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1184597/index.htm

[lakers_forever]

Common Sense.

[lakers_forever]

Basketball is always like that. MJ wasn't actually more impactful than Hakeem. Switch their team and Hakeem's the one ranked higher.

The overrating of Olajuwon continues. :facepalm He was never at MJ's league.
The guy wasn't even a first team regular in the 90's.

[Anaximandro1]

Uh, yeah. There were questions early in Garnett's career about whether he was even willing to take big shots. People said he shied away from the moment. Just go back and look at some of the articles people wrote about him.

I don't necessarily agree with the criticisms,but history shows Kobe and Duncan were better in those situations.Exactly.KG has proven that he can't play well as the clear and obvious 1st option.

Come playoff time,KG's field goal percentage is terrible,for big man standard.He shot over 50% from the field for the first and only time in 2003.

Playoffs--Kevin Garnett


1997 FG 47.1%

1998 FG 48.0%

1999 FG 44.3%

2000 38.5%

2001 46.6%

2002 42.9%

2003 51.4%

2004 45.2%

2008 49.5%

2010 49.5%

2011 43.9%

On top of that,KG can not put players in foul trouble,thus limiting his own chances of scoring;After all,he is basically a jump-shooter.

Free Throw Attemps 465

Playoff Games Played 104

FTA: 4.5
On a side note,I'd take Dirk over KG.

[LMFAO]

[QUOTE=Harison]Thats a myth, sorry:

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

Garnett and Duncan

A criticism often volleyed toward Kevin Garnett is his reluctance to take over games down the stretch. Of course, most bigs are hampered by this. And, with regards to his chief rival, Tim Duncan, KG

[Harison]

wow when your sucking KG's dick do you lick his balls? KG clutch? Duncan not? You sir are what we call a ****ing retard. When the championship was on the line in 03 Tim was 2 blocks shy of a quad double. What you are using is stats. That does not tall the whole story. Bottom line is guys like Tim have the IQ it takes to know how and when to defer and how and when to take over. That is why Tim has four rings and KG a faux one. BTW I watched every KG in his prime vs Tim in his prime match up and they were never even close. Tim is one of the biggest reasons KG could not get past the first round for much of his time in Minny.
No, they're both clutch, as I already proven. Since your only "argument" is ad hominem, I'm adding you to the list all trolls go, i.e. ignore :rolleyes:

[lefthook00]

..

[rodman91]

You can say same thing for Iverson too if he was on Lakers and playing with such teammates & coach. But its just a "what if"

Kobe has 2FMVP and 4 rings more than Garnett, so...

[swi7ch]

Would of been good to see KG on a decent team in his prime

True, but he wanted to be a hero instead of being smart and teaming up with other HoF.

Now he's washed up and on a good team.

That's why I like the LBJ move---win multiple championships while still in your prime.

[Hittin_Shots]

True, but he wanted to be a hero instead of being smart and teaming up with other HoF.

Now he's washed up and on a good team.

That's why I like the LBJ move---win multiple championships while still in your prime.

Prime PP,Ray and Garnett wuda been nice :)

[Disaprine]

Would of been good to see KG on a decent team in his prime
this

[DMAVS41]

Yes idiot.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1184597/index.htm

Not sure what the opinions of those players are worth if they don't give Carmelo (by far the best shot maker with the game on the line the last 8 years in the NBA) 1 single vote.

LOL at Durant over Dirk as well.

Not sure how serious we can take a poll that ignores the best game winning shot maker of the era by a wide margin.

Of course Kobe is clutch, but not even close to the extent he gets credit for. And what happened against the Mavs?
Terrible play in crunch time and he missed yet another playoff game winner. Now 7 of 25 on one metric and 6 of 23 on another metric for his career in the playoffs on game winning shots.

[Simple Jack]

I buy what you're selling. Had KG played on a different, more successful team, then yeah, he might have ranked above Kobe/Duncan/Shaq. But hey, that didn't happen.

I should also point out that Kevin's had flaws that Duncan and Kobe have proven not to have, mainly being go to scorers and being clutch.

Doesn't that suggest a flaw in the way we rank players? We rank them based on their situation rather than how good they actually are?

[DMAVS41]

Doesn't that suggest a flaw in the way we rank players? We rank them based on their situation rather than how good they actually are?

Yes.

Its a huge flaw. However, there is just no way we can rank KG over Kobe. Kobe HAS accomplished so much and we just simply don't know what KG could have done.

Which is a shame.

However, we need to stop putting so much emphasis on rings. We need to factor in more how these players played on how their teams performed based on circumstances and expectations.

It makes ranking players a lot harder, but it will lead to more sound rankings. And we also need to use stats more. Not pointless accolades like all-star selections, all-nba, and all-defense.

Kobe just tied KG/Jordan/Payton with the most first team all defense selections ever. Kobe does not belong in that group whatsoever. Its pathetic.

But thats what sucks when all time greats waste their primes on shit franchises. We have to play the "what if" game. And we simply don't know what KG would have done. We do know that Kobe has helped his teams win 5 titles and put up some of the most impressive games/numbers of all time.

So the edge goes to Kobe. Fair or not.....

[LA_Showtime]

Doesn't that suggest a flaw in the way we rank players? We rank them based on their situation rather than how good they actually are?

Yes, it does. But it has to factor in somewhat, doesn't it?

It's one of many reasons I've warmed up to the idea of James, Wade, and Bosh teaming up in Miami. We'll know whether they were capable of winning a championship given the right pieces. Thankfully, we won't look back at their careers and say, "Damn, those are potentially top 15 players had they played on the right teams."

Note, I think LeBron's good enough to be top 15 regardless of whether he wins a championship or not.

[DMAVS41]

Yes, it does. But it has to factor in somewhat, doesn't it?

It's one of many reasons I've warmed up to the idea of James, Wade, and Bosh teaming up in Miami. We'll know whether they were capable of winning a championship given the right pieces. Thankfully, we won't look back at their careers and say, "Damn, those are potentially top 15 players had they played on the right teams."

Note, I think LeBron's good enough to be top 15 regardless of whether he wins a championship or not.

Great post.

There is nothing worse than having to play the "what if" game with great players.

That is why its impossible to rank KG over Kobe. We know Kobe accomplished great things with great teams. We think KG would have and saw some evidence, but not enough because his prime was wasted.

Now there is no excuse for Lebron and Wade. They either win multiple titles together and solidify their place in history, or they go the path of stockton and malone so to speak.

I love it. We don't have to wonder "what if"......

[Simple Jack]

Yes, it does. But it has to factor in somewhat, doesn't it?

It's one of many reasons I've warmed up to the idea of James, Wade, and Bosh teaming up in Miami. We'll know whether they were capable of winning a championship given the right pieces. Thankfully, we won't look back at their careers and say, "Damn, those are potentially top 15 players had they played on the right teams."

Note, I think LeBron's good enough to be top 15 regardless of whether he wins a championship or not.

I'm not saying there's a way to fix it, because rankings should be based on something concrete, rather than speculation.

What's even more annoying is people using these career rankings, and its respective criteria, to suggest one player is CURRENTLY better than another. Doesn't make sense either but that's the way it goes I guess.

[LA_Showtime]

Great post.

There is nothing worse than having to play the "what if" game with great players.

That is why its impossible to rank KG over Kobe. We know Kobe accomplished great things with great teams. We think KG would have and saw some evidence, but not enough because his prime was wasted.

Now there is no excuse for Lebron and Wade. They either win multiple titles together and solidify their place in history, or they go the path of stockton and malone so to speak.

I love it. We don't have to wonder "what if"......

Over the past few years I've begun to think Garnett would have been ranked higher than Kobe, Duncan, AND Shaq had he played on a championship caliber team for more than a year in Minny. He impacts the game in so many ways, despite clearly being out of his prime. I'd put him up there with only Bird and Jordan as far as intangibles go.

[LA_Showtime]

I'm not saying there's a way to fix it, because rankings should be based on something concrete, rather than speculation.

What's even more annoying is people using these career rankings, and its respective criteria, to suggest one player is CURRENTLY better than another. Doesn't make sense either but that's the way it goes I guess.

There should definitely be a clear line between better player and better career. There isn't, though; at least not on here. :lol

[DMAVS41]

Over the past few years I've begun to think Garnett would have been ranked higher than Kobe, Duncan, AND Shaq had he played on a championship caliber team for more than a year in Minny. He impacts the game in so many ways, despite clearly being out of his prime. I'd put him up there with only Bird and Jordan as far as intangibles go.

Its really a shame. I think the range for KG could have been huge. By that, I mean that KG might have been considered a top 5 player of all time in perfect circumstances.............but is now generally regarded in that 15 to 20 range. Which is still great of course because his level of play and impact was so great.

We'll just never know. Its a travesty too. The guy was just so versatile and was truly the epitome of a team player. Even at age 35 he's still arguably the best overall defensive player in the league.

I just really wonder what a guy like KG could have accomplished if he played with a quality squad and another elite player like pierce his entire prime.

Would have been crazy to watch.

[Killbot]

People get the notion that KG isn't clutch. He is. Sometimes he doesn't show it on the offensive side, but he is one of the greatest clutch players on the defensive side to ever play the game.

Oh and Kobe only has better career achievements and scoring (due to hoisting up more shots) than Garnett. Garnett is far and away, a better player.

[Eat Like A Bosh]

Well ranking a player, luck does come to play. It's not your fault when you got a shit team around you all the time.
It's just based on their surrondings, the situation they are in. Had Tim Duncan and Kevin Garnett switched places, we would be thinking the opposite of each player today. Had KG came to the Lakers, yeah we would see him different too. But these what if games are just stupid.

But right now, Kobe has a better career resume, like it or not.

If Kevin Garnett has 3 rings, 1 regular MVP and 3 Finals MVP however, I might rank him above Kobe, maybe even Tim depending on the situation.

[M.Bustly15A5RU8]

a prime Kevin Garnett has at least as much impact on the court as a prime Kobe Bryant.

People are blinded because Kobe Bryant is a Laker and has more rings (rings argument = end of debate for stupid people)

[M.Bustly15A5RU8]

People get the notion that KG isn't clutch. He is. Sometimes he doesn't show it on the offensive side, but he is one of the greatest clutch players on the defensive side to ever play the game.

Oh and Kobe only has better career achievements and scoring (due to hoisting up more shots) than Garnett. Garnett is far and away, a better player.

:applause:

[rule1223]

in 20 years no one will give a shit about garnett, but kobes name will forever be relevant. Joining the super exclusive club that includes wilt, russel,dr.j, bird, magic, jordan, shaq.

[FourthTenor]

I buy what you're selling. Had KG played on a different, more successful team, then yeah, he might have ranked above Kobe/Duncan/Shaq. But hey, that didn't happen.

I should also point out that Kevin's had flaws that Duncan and Kobe have proven not to have, mainly being go to scorers and being clutch.


statistically kobe really isnt very clutch, at all.

[I.R.Beast]

There's no point comparing the 2 players...one is a PF the other is an SG. 2 completely different skillsets. Kobe was the best player at his position for 8/10ths of this decade, meanwhile Garnett was never better than Duncan.

Garnett to me hid/hides behind a tough guy facade, false bravado and over exaggerated heart and passion, but in crucial moments of games/playoff games in minnesota he folded and shyed away; showing his true colors. Being shipped to boston is the best thing ever happened to garnet. Paul Pierce allowed him to focus on defense(which he is great at) whilst Paul handles clutch scoring and leading by example en route to a title. Garnett seemed to be the celtic leader because of how "passionate and vocal" he comes accross but Paul Pierce is/was undoubtedly the leader of that team especially by example with his play. Garnett set the tone defensively downlow with Paul Pierce playing great perimeter defense on elite SG/SFs.

[M.Bustly15A5RU8]

There's no point comparing the 2 players...one is a PF the other is an SG. 2 completely different skillsets. Kobe was the best player at his position for 8/10ths of this decade, meanwhile Garnett was never better than Duncan.

Garnett to me hid/hides behind a tough guy facade, false bravado and over exaggerated heart and passion, but in crucial moments of games/playoff games in minnesota he folded and shyed away; showing his true colors. Being shipped to boston is the best thing ever happened to garnet. Paul Pierce allowed him to focus on defense(which he is great at) whilst Paul handles clutch scoring and leading by example en route to a title. Garnett seemed to be the celtic leader because of how "passionate and vocal" he comes accross but Paul Pierce is/was undoubtedly the leader of that team especially by example with his play. Garnett set the tone defensively downlow with Paul Pierce playing great perimeter defense on elite SG/SFs.

:roll:

[Hittin_Shots]

There's no point comparing the 2 players...one is a PF the other is an SG. 2 completely different skillsets. Kobe was the best player at his position for 8/10ths of this decade, meanwhile Garnett was never better than Duncan.

Garnett to me hid/hides behind a tough guy facade, false bravado and over exaggerated heart and passion, but in crucial moments of games/playoff games in minnesota he folded and shyed away; showing his true colors. Being shipped to boston is the best thing ever happened to garnet. Paul Pierce allowed him to focus on defense(which he is great at) whilst Paul handles clutch scoring and leading by example en route to a title. Garnett seemed to be the celtic leader because of how "passionate and vocal" he comes accross but Paul Pierce is/was undoubtedly the leader of that team especially by example with his play. Garnett set the tone defensively downlow with Paul Pierce playing great perimeter defense on elite SG/SFs.

Undoubtedly? I would say most people that watched them would say undoubtedly KG was the leader...

[SpecialQue]

To quote Charlie Sheen, "Winning!"

[I.R.Beast]

statistically kobe really isnt very clutch, at all.

I've read lots of your post whilst waiting in moderation for my account to be completely activated. There is no statistic that can qualify clutch. Bryant failed this years post season in that department. a clutch shot can occur at almost any juncture of a basketball game, not just in the fourth quarter with so many minutes left etc. A clutch basket can be a basket that silences a crowd about to erupt for their on the verge of a 14-0. A clutch shot can be to end a quarter that changes a 5 point lead into a 2 point leading heading into the 4th quarter despite your team being throughly outplayed. Clutch shots are all situational, and have momentum/morale swinging consequences if they are made or missed. Bryant has made those types of shots his entire career, the majority of the sports community don't deem him as clutch for absolutely no reason at all.

In addition the fact that you need to point to an arbitrary statistic that happens to be named "clutch" to prove someone is clutch that people don't otherwise see speaks volumes of how that player is not clutch. This LeBron James era of fans have nothing but their statistics to point at but no real results to show for it. You see the numbers and look back at the performance and you realize as a hardcore fan that he is not as impressive as numeric production implicates. His numbers are as inflated as his ego.

[Rysio]

:violin:

maybe because he's 100 times better scorer than kg.

[I.R.Beast]

Undoubtedly? I would say most people that watched them would say undoubtedly KG was the leader...

Like i said, Garnette passionate demeanor etc. painted a picture of him being the leader.

[1Time4YourMind]

Garnett to me hid/hides behind a tough guy facade, false bravado and over exaggerated heart and passion, but in crucial moments of games/playoff games in minnesota he folded and shyed away; showing his true colors. Being shipped to boston is the best thing ever happened to garnet. Paul Pierce allowed him to focus on defense(which he is great at) whilst Paul handles clutch scoring and leading by example en route to a title. Garnett seemed to be the celtic leader because of how "passionate and vocal" he comes accross but Paul Pierce is/was undoubtedly the leader of that team especially by example with his play. Garnett set the tone defensively downlow with Paul Pierce playing great perimeter defense on elite SG/SFs.
LOL by his play? garnett had the best statistical output of the playoffs, the defensive player of the year award and was the defensive ANCHOR of the team. it was basically garnett's influence in training camp that morphed the celts into a defensive beast. yes he is a 'thug' and pisses me off at times but to not acknowledge him as the best/most impactful player in 2008 is stupid.

the only reason why the FMVP went to paul pierce was because he stuck with the franchise for many years and it would have been 'proper' to give him the award. and even then i would rather consider giving it to ray allen, who played all 48 minutes of that pivotal game 4, hit the game winning shot and set a finals record for 3 pointers. rays finals performance was great despite his lacluster 1st 3 rounds.

[Mor'Fiyah]

I've read lots of your post whilst waiting in moderation for my account to be completely activated. There is no statistic that can qualify clutch. Bryant failed this years post season in that department. a clutch shot can occur at almost any juncture of a basketball game, not just in the fourth quarter with so many minutes left etc. A clutch basket can be a basket that silences a crowd about to erupt for their on the verge of a 14-0. A clutch shot can be to end a quarter that changes a 5 point lead into a 2 point leading heading into the 4th quarter despite your team being throughly outplayed. Clutch shots are all situational, and have momentum/morale swinging consequences if they are made or missed. Bryant has made those types of shots his entire career, the majority of the sports community don't deem him as clutch for absolutely no reason at all.

In addition the fact that you need to point to an arbitrary statistic that happens to be named "clutch" to prove someone is clutch that people don't otherwise see speaks volumes of how that player is not clutch. This LeBron James era of fans have nothing but their statistics to point at but no real results to show for it. You see the numbers and look back at the performance and you realize as a hardcore fan that he is not as impressive as numeric production implicates. His numbers are as inflated as his ego.

I was going to post, thought better of it, then read your post. Thank you. Someone who gets it finally. I am guessing you ACTUALLY play team sports and understand the difference between using stats as guidelines and understanding that somethings are too subjective and real to model with numbers.

[Hittin_Shots]

Like i said, Garnette passionate demeanor etc. painted a picture of him being the leader.

Painting the picture of being the leader to teammates kinda makes ya the leader....

[Heavincent]

statistically kobe really isnt very clutch, at all.

Stats don't determine how clutch someone is. You have to actually watch the game.

And besides, wasn't Kobe the league leader in clutch stats anyway?

[Mor'Fiyah]

KG is a lock for the hall of fame... to say he is not better than arguably the second greatest shooting guard in the history of the game does not diminish Garnett as a player.

[TheAnchorman]

Garnett seemed to be the celtic leader because of how "passionate and vocal" he comes accross but Paul Pierce is/was undoubtedly the leader of that team especially by example with his play.
Um Garnett was the best player and leader of that Celtics team.

[Round Mound]

On the topic, Kobe is ranked higher because of better career. If we rank them purely as players, Kobe obviously was better scorer, while KG was better at pretty much everything else, and has bigger impact on the team.

By most real NBA fans know Garnett was a better player. He is in his last years but in his prime he was the Best All Around PF of the late 90s and 2000s

Garnett as a Player > Kobe

Publicity, Marketing, Team Acompilshments Kobe wins but in a game Garnett would prime would do more harm on all ends other than Kobe: streak shooter

[chazzy]

statistically kobe really isnt very clutch, at all.
He's actually pretty damn clutch statistically, though he's only above average on game winning shots.

[Hittin_Shots]

:violin:

maybe because he's 100 times better scorer than kg.

KG career ppg = 19.5

Kobe career ppg = 25.3

Actually he's 1.3 times the better scorer, but u were close.

[LeFraud James]

I thought this argument was settled 2 rings ago :facepalm

[Rysio]

KG career ppg = 19.5

Kobe career ppg = 25.3

Actually he's 1.3 times the better scorer, but u were close.
:rolleyes:

[brownmamba00]

I think a prime KG had more impact then a prime TD on the court.
As far as impact go I can only list Shaq above him in the past decade imo.

So yes KG probably had more impact on the game then Kobe and was a great leader but still he only played one finals with a stacked team.

The only flaw in KG's game was taking games over scoring wise while Kobe is quite the opposite.

I can't really decide tho. You can't go wrong here with both of them

[Mor'Fiyah]

By most real NBA fans know Garnett was a better player. He is in his last years but in his prime he was the Best All Around PF of the late 90s and 2000s

Garnett as a Player > Kobe

Publicity, Marketing, Team Acompilshments Kobe wins but in a game Garnett would prime would do more harm on all ends other than Kobe: streak shooter

On what basis are you making these statements? Most REAL NBA fans? Or by that do you mean YOU and anyone with the same opinion as you even if its the minority opinion (and an exceedingly small minority at that)?

[Hittin_Shots]

:rolleyes:

Great rebuttal.

[I.R.Beast]

I was going to post, thought better of it, then read your post. Thank you. Someone who gets it finally. I am guessing you ACTUALLY play team sports and understand the difference between using stats as guidelines and understanding that somethings are too subjective and real to model with numbers.

James gaudy numbers come at a very expensive price which is the producivity of his support. Teammates need to feel as though they are contributing, if you take their area of contribution away from them they become lost in the game and it affects their performance negatively. Whatever confidence they get from doing their job is now gone because you're taking your big man's rebs, bringing the ball down the floor for the pg, plus scoring the majority of the points. That's where LeBron hurts his team, his numbers aren't worth the lost of team chemistry.

[mentallooser]

I'm kinda buying this. At their best I really felt like Garnett had more effect on the game than Kobe. Both amazing players and honestly when you get to that level of player the differences between players are so small that we the viewers tend to make up the differences in our minds. On any given day either one could be the best player in the world along with others like Shaq and Duncan.

[Nero Tulip]

Well, if given the choice I'm sure most people who choose to build around prime Garnett than prime Kobe.

But to answer the question, it's the career. The point of the game is winning, and Garnett, although he was in a shitty organisation, deserves to be lower because of his lack of success.

[I.R.Beast]

I'm kinda buying this. At their best I really felt like Garnett had more effect on the game than Kobe. Both amazing players and honestly when you get to that level of player the differences between players are so small that we the viewers tend to make up the differences in our minds. On any given day either one could be the best player in the world along with others like Shaq and Duncan.

bigs generally have more affect on the game than guards...point is kinda moot....Right now dwight howard has more effect on the game than Kobe, Lebron, Wade, etc. has ever had, but that has more to do with the importance of the position than being a better player.

[Hittin_Shots]

bigs generally have more affect on the game than guards...point is kinda moot....Right now dwight howard has more effect on the game than Kobe, Lebron, Wade, etc. has ever had, but that has more to do with the importance of the position than being a better player.

Position you play is based on ur size and skillset which can also be said is what makes you a better player so....yea..

[IN-PAX-WE-TRUST]

Skill, talent, Shooting, scoring, 5 rings. Not big things.

[Disaprine]

his accomplishments puts him above KG.

[TheMarkMadsen]

because he is more successful. But that is greatly due to the players he had on his team and his coach. If Kobe had Mark Madsen, Olowokandi, Troy Hudson and Ervin Johnson like Garnett did he wouldn't have been as successful. Same situation with Duncan


Kobe had mark madsen and helped lead him to two straight rings. :bowdown:

[bleedinpurpleTwo]

Keep in mind that when Kobe was the leader of a really shitty team, they went to the playoffs twice in the very tough West.
When KG was the leader of a really shitty team, they were in the lottery. Is that correct?

[M.Bustly15A5RU8]

Keep in mind that when Kobe was the leader of a really shitty team, they went to the playoffs twice in the very tough West.
When KG was the leader of a really shitty team, they were in the lottery. Is that correct?

:facepalm

Kevin Garnett took a team with 34 year old Sam Cassell and 33 year old Latrell Sprewell as his 2nd and 3rd best players all the way to the WCF.

Playoff averages:

24.3 ppg
14.6 rpg
5.1 apg
2.3 bpg
1.3 spg

[Fatal9]

being a much better playoff performer.

[M.Bustly15A5RU8]

Kobe Bryant can have the #4 spot of the last decade. Right behind Shaq/Timmy/KG.

Just a shame how the hype machine tries to lift Kobe above them.

[indiefan24]

On what basis are you making these statements? Most REAL NBA fans? Or by that do you mean YOU and anyone with the same opinion as you even if its the minority opinion (and an exceedingly small minority at that)?

He won't respond. All he'll do is create more Barkley threads.

[Bigsmoke]

Kobe >> KG

[KD35]

:facepalm

Kevin Garnett took a team with 34 year old Sam Cassell and 33 year old Latrell Sprewell as his 2nd and 3rd best players all the way to the WCF.

Playoff averages:

24.3 ppg
14.6 rpg
5.1 apg
2.3 bpg
1.3 spg

Cassell was still a 20ppg guy while Sprewell gave you 17 during the regular season...they weren't as bad as you try to make their ages indicate. That being said, KG was a first round exit every year until he had them, so they didn't exactly ride KGs coattails to the WCF

[ShaqAttack3234]

being a much better playoff performer.

Pretty much this. His 3 year playoff run from 2008-2010(among the best 3 year playoff stretches ever) makes this obvious. His 2001 run is also more impressive than any of KG's, imo.

[The-Legend-24]

:facepalm

Kevin Garnett took a team with 34 year old Sam Cassell and 33 year old Latrell Sprewell as his 2nd and 3rd best players all the way to the WCF.

Playoff averages:

24.3 ppg
14.6 rpg
5.1 apg
2.3 bpg
1.3 spg
Kobe took Smush parker and kwame brown and luke walton as his starters to the playoffs. NUFF SAID
/Thread.

[Carbine]

Given equal supporting casts, it's hard for me to imagine Garnett not winning as many titles as Kobe. I'm not even the biggest Garnett fan, but he has had some really crappy teams around him during his best years compared to what other great players of equal caliber had around them.

It wasn't until Garnett had one foot out of his prime that he had what anyone would consider a championship caliber supporting cast - and he led his team to a title. Made the finals two years later when he was clearly out of his prime.

Meanwhile, Kobe had the luxury of playing with Shaq in his prime and recently the best supporting cast in basketball from '09-'11 and an elite one in '08.

[M.Bustly15A5RU8]

Kobe took Smush parker and kwame brown and luke walton as his starters to the playoffs. NUFF SAID
/Thread.

Kobe Bryant + Lamar Odom + scrubs = 1st round exit
(the season before he had Caron Butler too and led them to 34-48 record :bowdown:)

Kevin Garnett + 34yo Sam Cassell + 33yo Latrell Sprewell + Scrubs = WCF

:confusedshrug:

[The-Legend-24]

Kobe Bryant + prime Lamar Odom + scrubs = 1st round exit

Kevin Garnett + 34yo Sam Cassell + 33yo Latrell Sprewell + Scrubs = WCF

:confusedshrug:
:oldlol: Prime Lamar Odom? :roll: That dude is inconsistent as hell, if KG was on that laker team he don't even make the playoffs. That lakers team with Kobe won what? about 40+games, without kobe that team is in the lottery.

[Harison]

Pretty much this. His 3 year playoff run from 2008-2010(among the best 3 year playoff stretches ever) makes this obvious. His 2001 run is also more impressive than any of KG's, imo.
You should know better than this.

30.1/5.7/5.6 is better than 27.0/15.7/5.2 with DPOY defense... how? Fact is, none of Kobe's best Playoffs performances are better than Garnett's best. Unless you value scoring-only, and dont care about anything else.

[The-Legend-24]

You should know better than this.

30.1/5.7/5.6 is better than 27.0/15.7/5.2 with DPOY defense... how? Fact is, none of Kobe's best Playoffs performances are better than Garnett's best. Unless you value scoring-only, and dont care about anything else.
Isn't that how you win games.. by scoring? :confusedshrug:

[Samurai Swoosh]

Isn't that how you win games.. by scoring? :confusedshrug:
And by shutting people down. KG was the only reason Minnesota had a good defense. To be fair ...

[Bigsmoke]

:facepalm

Kevin Garnett took a team with 34 year old Sam Cassell and 33 year old Latrell Sprewell as his 2nd and 3rd best players all the way to the WCF.

Playoff averages:

24.3 ppg
14.6 rpg
5.1 apg
2.3 bpg
1.3 spg

Cassell was still pretty damn good making the All Star team and being on the ALL NBA 2nd team as well... hell, dude played a huge role on the Clippers 2 years later.

[M.Bustly15A5RU8]

You should know better than this.

30.1/5.7/5.6 is better than 27.0/15.7/5.2 with DPOY defense... how? Fact is, none of Kobe's best Playoffs performances are better than Garnett's best. Unless you value scoring-only, and dont care about anything else.

:applause:

[eliteballer]

"Kobe," says Celtic Coach Doc Rivers, "might be the best help defender since Pippen."


http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/4972/it-s-the-lakers-court-but-it-s-the-celtics-house

[bingo123]

Isn't that how you win games.. by scoring? :confusedshrug:

Actually rebounding and defense>>scoring in term of winning.

[eliteballer]

Garnett cant take over a game offensively, which is why they needed Cassell in the first place.

[Jacks3]

OP is correct. Peak/Prime KG was a more dominant player thanks to his epic defense and rebounding. I have him above Bryant on the All-Time list.

[Jacks3]

Meanwhile, Kobe had the luxury of playing with Shaq in his prime and recently the best supporting cast in basketball from '09-'11 and an elite one in '08.
Yeah, and KG's 08 team was a better supporting cast than Kobe has ever had as the #1 guy.

[Bigsmoke]

Actually rebounding and defense>>scoring in term of winning.

Pierce played a bigger role than KG did in the Finals. I'll tell you that right now.

[Harison]

Pierce played a bigger role than KG did in the Finals. I'll tell you that right now.
You probably havent watched those finals, if you speak like this :confusedshrug:

[ShaqAttack3234]

You should know better than this.

30.1/5.7/5.6 is better than 27.0/15.7/5.2 with DPOY defense... how? Fact is, none of Kobe's best Playoffs performances are better than Garnett's best. Unless you value scoring-only, and dont care about anything else.

You're comparing 1 series to 4 series playoff runs? :facepalm And a first round series at that?

Some of Kobe's series....

2001 WCSF- 35 ppg, 9 rpg, 4.3 apg, 47.3 FG%, 86.4 FT%
2001 WCF- 33.3 ppg, 7 rpg, 7 apg, 1.5 spg, 51.4 FG%, 35.7 3P%,
2002 Finals- 26.8 ppg, 5.8 rpg, 5.3 apg, 1.5 spg, 51.4 FG%, 50.5 3P%
2008 1st round- 33.5 ppg, 5.3 rpg, 6.3 apg, 1.5 spg, 1.5 bpg, 50 FG%
2008 WCSF- 33.2 ppg, 7 rpg, 7.2 apg, 49.1 FG%, 83.3 FT%
2008 WCF- 29.2 ppg, 5.6 rpg, 3.8 apg, 1.6 spg, 53.3 FG%, 90.9 FT%
2009 WCF- 34 ppg, 5.8 rpg, 5.8 apg, 48.1 FG%, 93.1 FT%
2010 WCSF- 32.2 ppg, 3.8 rpg, 5.8 apg, 52.3 FG%, 86.8 FT%
2010 WCF- 33.7 ppg, 7.2 rpg, 8.3 apg, 1.2 bpg, 52.1 FG%, 43.1 3P%, 88.1 FT%

And he won all of them too.

:bowdown:

[bleedinpurpleTwo]

:facepalm

Kevin Garnett took a team with 34 year old Sam Cassell and 33 year old Latrell Sprewell as his 2nd and 3rd best players all the way to the WCF.

Playoff averages:

24.3 ppg
14.6 rpg
5.1 apg
2.3 bpg
1.3 spg

that was NOT a shitty team!
I'm talking SHITTY! I'm talking Smush Parker, Luke Walton and Kwame Brown as STARTERS.

[Jordan23GOAT]

:lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol

[Harison]

You're comparing 1 series to 4 series playoff runs? :facepalm And a first round series at that?

Some of Kobe's series....

2001 WCSF- 35 ppg, 9 rpg, 4.3 apg, 47.3 FG%, 86.4 FT%
2001 WCF- 33.3 ppg, 7 rpg, 7 apg, 1.5 spg, 51.4 FG%, 35.7 3P%,
2002 Finals- 26.8 ppg, 5.8 rpg, 5.3 apg, 1.5 spg, 51.4 FG%, 50.5 3P%
2008 1st round- 33.5 ppg, 5.3 rpg, 6.3 apg, 1.5 spg, 1.5 bpg, 50 FG%
2008 WCSF- 33.2 ppg, 7 rpg, 7.2 apg, 49.1 FG%, 83.3 FT%
2008 WCF- 29.2 ppg, 5.6 rpg, 3.8 apg, 1.6 spg, 53.3 FG%, 90.9 FT%
2009 WCF- 34 ppg, 5.8 rpg, 5.8 apg, 48.1 FG%, 93.1 FT%
2010 WCSF- 32.2 ppg, 3.8 rpg, 5.8 apg, 52.3 FG%, 86.8 FT%
2010 WCF- 33.7 ppg, 7.2 rpg, 8.3 apg, 1.2 bpg, 52.1 FG%, 43.1 3P%, 88.1 FT%

And he won all of them too.

:bowdown:
Again, none of them are better than 27.0/15.7/5.2 with DPOY defense. And Kobe didnt win any of those series by himself, his team did. First he was 2nd banana to Shaq, '08+ he had very solid team too.

[brownmamba00]

Again, none of them are better than 27.0/15.7/5.2 with DPOY defense. And Kobe didnt win any of those series by himself, his team did. First he was 2nd banana to Shaq, '08+ he had very solid team too.
Kobe's WCSF and WCF in '01 are EASILY better then what you posted. And let's not act like Kobe wasn't playing all time great perimeter D.

[catch24]

Kobe's WCSF and WCF in '01 are EASILY better then what you posted. And let's not act like Kobe wasn't playing all time great perimeter D.

1st team elite All NBA defense at that.

[Jacks3]

Again, none of them are better than 27.0/15.7/5.2 with DPOY defense.
:roll:

[Rysio]

Again, none of them are better than 27.0/15.7/5.2 with DPOY defense. And Kobe didnt win any of those series by himself, his team did. First he was 2nd banana to Shaq, '08+ he had very solid team too.
lol both kobe and shaq outplayed kg in that series for 4 out of 6 games.

[lefthook00]

It's the scoring that makes Kobe better. Scoring will always be the best part of any sport. Fact.

[Harison]

Kobe's WCSF and WCF in '01 are EASILY better then what you posted. And let's not act like Kobe wasn't playing all time great perimeter D.
+8 points, -7 rebounds, -1 assist, thats equal stats right there. Now defense - young Kobe wasnt even elite defensively, but even if he was - call me when guards elite defense is anywhere near equal All-time great defensive big anchor.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Again, none of them are better than 27.0/15.7/5.2 with DPOY defense. And Kobe didnt win any of those series by himself, his team did. First he was 2nd banana to Shaq, '08+ he had very solid team too.

He was still the MVP in all of those series except the '01 WCSF and '02 Finals. Some of those series, he really carried the Lakers, particularly the 2010 WCF and 2008 WCF. Of course, he had a very solid team, he was winning championships or making it to the finals in all of those runs. Nobody does that without a solid team.

And I said Kobe has 4 playoff runs superior to any of KG's playoff runs(2001 and 2008-2010), 1 series is not a playoff run, it's a series, and I'd take several of Kobe's series over KG's first round series in 2003.

[The-Legend-24]

What makes Kobe better than Kg? Hmm he's just better :oldlol: S Rings say hi.

[brownmamba00]

+8 points, -7 rebounds, -1 assist, thats equal stats right there. Now defense - young Kobe wasnt even elite defensively, but even if he was - call me when guards elite defense is anywhere near equal All-time great defensive big anchor.
I'm not saying Kobe had the same impact on D. But the difference in his offensive play is big enough to close that gap.

And as far as I remember those stats you posted of KG are in a first round loss vs the Lakers (the team Kobe plays in:rolleyes: )

[lefthook00]

+8 points, -7 rebounds, -1 assist, thats equal stats right there. Now defense - young Kobe wasnt even elite defensively, but even if he was - call me when guards elite defense is anywhere near equal All-time great defensive big anchor.

You can't just add and subtract different stats to make them equal lol. And young Kobe is exactly when he was elite defensively.

[Harison]

He was still the MVP in all of those series except the '01 WCSF and '02 Finals. Some of those series, he really carried the Lakers, particularly the 2010 WCF and 2008 WCF. Of course, he had a very solid team, he was winning championships or making it to the finals in all of those runs. Nobody does that without a solid team.

And I said Kobe has 4 playoff runs superior to any of KG's playoff runs(2001 and 2008-2010), 1 series is not a playoff run, it's a series, and I'd take several of Kobe's series over KG's first round series in 2003.
Shaq was MVP for "Kobes best series" as mentioned above, and Kobe had amazing team '08+ later which more than helped him to win two rings as the man. Thats what concerns winning, and if you take equally to Garnett stat-wise Kobe's best series with obviously weaker defensive impact as better than KG, then you are biased.

[ShaqAttack3234]

Shaq was MVP for "Kobes best series" as mentioned above, and Kobe had amazing team '08+ later which more than helped him to win two rings as the man. Thats what concerns winning, and if you take equally to Garnett stat-wise Kobe's best series with obviously weaker defensive impact as better than KG, then you are biased.

Kobe's team was definitely not amazing in 2008, and it really wasn't in 2009 and 2010 either. And Shaq was not the MVP of the 2001 WCF.

[Harison]

I'm not saying Kobe had the same impact on D. But the difference in his offensive play is big enough to close that gap.

And as far as I remember those stats you posted of KG are in a first round loss vs the Lakers (the team Kobe plays in:rolleyes: )
KG rebounding is enough to close gap in scoring, or rebounding doesnt matter to you? Defense however is on entirely different level. And yes, KG lost to prime Shaq and Kobe, do you think he should have won? :oldlol:


You can't just add and subtract different stats to make them equal lol. And young Kobe is exactly when he was elite defensively.
Actually you can, rebound gives your team extra possession, which often translates to 1 point-per-rebound (sometimes less, sometimes more, depending how well team scores). For example in '01 Lakers were scoring 108.4 per 100 possessions, i.e. it would be 1,08 extra point for rebound.

The best defensive years were when Kobe matured a bit, '03+. Regardless when was his defensive peak, it was always inferior to Garnett's.

[brownmamba00]

KG rebounding is enough to close gap in scoring, or rebounding doesnt matter to you? Defense however is on entirely different level. And yes, KG lost to prime Shaq and Kobe, do you think he should have won? :oldlol:


Rebounding is enough to close the gap between 8 more points on better efficiency and very clutch play? SMH.

And yes KG def. had a better impact on D. But let's not act like Kobe wasn't playing elite all time great perimeter D and his team won AND on top of that he was playing against another all time great Duncan.

[Carbine]

Kobe's team was definitely not amazing in 2008, and it really wasn't in 2009 and 2010 either. And Shaq was not the MVP of the 2001 WCF.

Kobe had the best supporting cast in Basketball both of those years.

As a perimeter guard, you really can't draw up a better supporting cast in the era we're in.

-Low Post scorer....check

-Height/Length front court.....they could realistically put out a front line with three 7 footers, all with different skills and strengths.

-Greatest coach ever....check

-Legit second option.....check

-Defensive wing (Ariza, Artest) to not burden Kobe with the task of defending the other teams best perimeter player all game....check.

[Jacks3]

KG's rebounding is overrated. Many of his defensive re-bounds were of the "easy" variety where he would grab a rebound that would have been grabbed by a teammate anyway. People need to realize there are diminishing returns here. There have been studies showing that 75-80% of defensive rebounds are going to be grabbed by a teammate anyway. And for his "epic" rebounding, the Wolves were consistently a average rebounding team during his years there.

[Harison]

Rebounding is enough to close the gap between 8 more points on better efficiency and very clutch play? SMH.

And yes KG def. had a better impact on D. But let's not act like Kobe wasn't playing elite all time great perimeter D and his team won AND on top of that he was playing against another all time great Duncan.
If you dont hate math, formula above how to translate rebounds to points. Efficiency was overall very similar, even though Kobe didnt faced main defensive attention, KG did. I'll give you clutch play, although 25% on game winners isnt exactly something to brag about.

As I said, even in his best defensive years Kobe's impact wasnt close to KG's. When you evaluate players, you look at the total impact, not just "but he scores more points!".

[amfirst]

because he is more successful. But that is greatly due to the players he had on his team and his coach. If Kobe had Mark Madsen, Olowokandi, Troy Hudson and Ervin Johnson like Garnett did he wouldn't have been as successful. Same situation with Duncan

True that, but Kobe would at least carried them to the playoffs. Garnett is like LeBron he would rather pass the ball to some inferior player on his team than will them to victory.

[brownmamba00]

If you dont hate math, formula above how to translate rebounds to points. Efficiency was overall very similar, even though Kobe didnt faced main defensive attention, KG did. I'll give you clutch play, although 25% on game winners isnt exactly something to brag about.

As I said, even in his best defensive years Kobe's impact wasnt close to KG's. When you evaluate players, you look at the total impact, not just "but he scores more points!".
+8 points, -7 rebounds, -1 assist

is this the formula you're talking about? c'mon dude. Using rebounding as efficiency when comparing a guard to a bigman is :facepalm.

But agree to disagree I guess.

[Harison]

True that, but Kobe would at least carried them to the playoffs. Garnett is like LeBron he would rather pass the ball to some inferior player on his team than will them to victory.
You really should watch this, and many other KG's prime games, because you missed them :cheers:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1VtZht_8t4

What concerns passes to "inferior player", it depends on situation - both KG and Kobe are known to rise up in the clutch, however they have different approach - Kobe will ignore his open teammate and rather shoot contested 30FT jumper, while KG will either shoot himself, or if he draws all defense and sees open teammate - pass to him. Thats called smart basketball. Remember Jordan pass to Kerr? Bird passes McHale or Parish? And thats the most clutch players, ever.

[INDI]

Y'all kill me with thear comments, like Kobe did nothing his whole career. One thing we should be able to agree on is when someone is top 10 on the mass majority of people's list ( number 6 on mine if anyone wanted to know) then the man must have been dominant at something. You can't call him a chucked because dominant offensive players are suppose to score. If he was just a chucker then people would put him in the class of ai, tmac etc....



Someone said he wasn't clutch. How many game winners or single man comebacks does one have to make to be considered clutch? Because Kobe has done it tooooooooooo many times for you to say otherwise. Where does Kevin rank alltime in your book?

[Jacks3]

You must be kidding. Kobe's production in the clutch (pts, ast, TS%) absolutely DESTROY KG. :facepalm

[brownmamba00]

You really should watch this, and many other KG's prime games, because you missed them :cheers:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1VtZht_8t4

What concerns passes to "inferior player", it depends on situation - both KG and Kobe are known to rise up in the clutch, however they have different approach - Kobe will ignore his open teammate and rather shoot contested 30FT jumper, while KG will either shoot himself, or if he draws all defense and sees open teammate - pass to him. Thats called smart basketball. Remember Jordan pass to Kerr? Bird passes McHale or Parish? And thats the most clutch players, ever.

imo there is a difference between the right play and the winning play (see game 2 last playoffs C's vs Knicks where Melo passed the ball up to the open guy Jeffries :facepalm )

[The-Legend-24]

Comparing A big man's Efficiency to a perimeter player? :roll: :roll: :roll:

[Harison]

+8 points, -7 rebounds, -1 assist

is this the formula you're talking about? c'mon dude. Using rebounding as efficiency when comparing a guard to a bigman is :facepalm.

But agree to disagree I guess.
7 rebounds for '03 Minny resulted in 7,4 extra points. Assist? 2+ points. Is 9,4+ translated points are enough to offset 8 points? Basing on team impact, sure. Thats before we get to defense, etc.

Point is, scoring isnt everything, rebounding and passing isnt everything, neither is defense, however combination of those (plus all other objective variables plus intangibles) to total team impact IS everything.

[Eat Like A Bosh]

A Player's situation has a lot to do with his overall career. Point is, sometimes as a great as a player someone is, he can't really control his own legacy. It's depends on luck a lot too.
If Kobe or Duncan rotted in Minny, we would be looking at them the same way we look at KG right now.

[Harison]

A Player's situation has a lot to do with his overall career. Point is, sometimes as a great as a player someone is, he can't really control his own legacy. It's depends on luck a lot too.
If Kobe or Duncan rotted in Minny, we would be looking at them the same way we look at KG right now.
Exactly. Basketball is a team sport, and regardless how great superstar is, he cant win alone. Kobe with Minny-like team ('05-07) couldnt do anything, neither could Jordan in his first years, even though they played out of their minds.

[Dream34]

Definitly has nothing to do with the fact that Kobe has won two titles as the man or how Kobe has won NINE more playoff series than Garnett as the undisputed number one option, or how Kobe is clearly a superior playoff performer than KG with some outstanding performances in the 01 WCF, 01 WCSF, 02 Finals, 08 WCF, 08 WCSF, 09 WCF, 10 WCSF, and 10 WCF. From 2008-2010, three consecutive playoffs of 30 pgg/5 assist/5 boards is totally meaningless.

[bleedinpurpleTwo]

Exactly. Basketball is a team sport, and regardless how great superstar is, he cant win alone. Kobe with Minny-like team ('05-07) couldnt do anything, neither could Jordan in his first years, even though they played out of their minds.

Smush Parker
Kwame Brown
Luke Walton
STARTERS.
You don't even want to talk about the bench.
Kobe did something with them.

[Harison]

Smush Parker
Kwame Brown
Luke Walton
STARTERS.
You don't even want to talk about the bench.
Kobe did something with them.
If reaching Playoffs twice and getting bounced in the 1st round, and another time even not reaching Playoffs at all, is "did something with them", then KG can share his experience with crap team too. He "did something with them" as well :oldlol:

[bleedinpurpleTwo]

If reaching Playoffs twice and getting bounced in the 1st round, and another time even not reaching Playoffs at all, is "did something with them", then KG can share his experience with crap team too. He "did something with them" as well :oldlol:

I don't recall KG doing anything with his shitty team. Maybe I am mistaken. What did he accomplish?

oh, and yes, making the playoffs in the very tough west with those scrubs is absolutely a positive accomplishment.

[Jacks3]

Prime KG missed the playoffs 3 straight years. :oldlol:

[c3z4r]

I would like to point out a thing that most people forget, if kobe was in garnett's place we would probably some of the highest scoring averages since jordan. I mean he was scoring 33 and 35 in his seasons playing with worse players than garnett ever did, so i don't see a reason y he wouldnt be averaging a least 30 every year since his 3 year in the league.

[Jacks3]

he would have multiple 35+ PPG years.

[Bernie Nips]

As players, in terms of talent and how they impacted the game for their situations and positions, they're very comparable. Pretty much even.

But you can't just rank based on that. I hate Kobe with a passion and think he's overrated as hell, but he's got 5 rings and 2 Finals MVPs. You have to rank him above KG, as they are pretty much even otherwise.

If careers are comparable = watch the games and see who is better.
If talent and output are comparable = career determines who is better.

Unfortunately, some players, like KG, are a victim of circumstances. As I've said before, I doubt he cares that he's ranked lower than someone like Kobe. He's left his mark on the game forever. He's one of the top 5 players of his generation. He'd be happy with that.

[Bernie Nips]

I would like to point out a thing that most people forget, if kobe was in garnett's place we would probably some of the highest scoring averages since jordan. I mean he was scoring 33 and 35 in his seasons playing with worse players than garnett ever did, so i don't see a reason y he wouldnt be averaging a least 30 every year since his 3 year in the league.

So... he'd basically be Iverson?

[Bernie Nips]

:roll: :roll: :roll:

Yeah, just stated I rank him over KG, pretty funny bro!

[Jacks3]

So... he'd basically be Iverson?
He'd be a much more efficient version of Iverson with much better defense and rebounding. Superior play-making too. :pimp:

[Jacks3]

he's overrated as hel[/I]l,
:roll:

[Bernie Nips]

:facepalm Im laughing at where it say, " i hate kobe with a passion"

Oh, yeah, that's pretty funny too hey. You got some wicked sense of humour! Do you own the entire boxset of Girlfriends, chill and laugh yo' ass off daily?

http://www.jaehakim.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/03/Girlfriends-1.jpg

[Boston C's]

I would like to point out a thing that most people forget, if kobe was in garnett's place we would probably some of the highest scoring averages since jordan. I mean he was scoring 33 and 35 in his seasons playing with worse players than garnett ever did, so i don't see a reason y he wouldnt be averaging a least 30 every year since his 3 year in the league.

Kobe had much worse teammates then K.G I'll take Latrell and Marbury over anyone kobe had on the lakers pre gasol post shaq era... mark madsen, smush parker, kwame brown, do I need to go on lol... this actually shows that kobe was better then garnett he took legit scrubs to the playoffs 2 out of the 3 yrs he was "the man" without any help so yea... K.g as a player isn't far behind from kobe its just the accolades in his career that don't quite measure up to kobe (5 rings to 1 mainly) but kobe on the timberwolves is not puttin up better stats then he did on the lakers because he would have more to work with in minnesota

[Boston C's]

because he is more successful. But that is greatly due to the players he had on his team and his coach. If Kobe had Mark Madsen, Olowokandi, Troy Hudson and Ervin Johnson like Garnett did he wouldn't have been as successful. Same situation with Duncan

You like krabby patties dont you squidward... (sry had to do it lmao)

[M.Bustly15A5RU8]

KG's rebounding is overrated. Many of his defensive re-bounds were of the "easy" variety where he would grab a rebound that would have been grabbed by a teammate anyway. People need to realize there are diminishing returns here. There have been studies showing that 75-80% of defensive rebounds are going to be grabbed by a teammate anyway. And for his "epic" rebounding, the Wolves were consistently a average rebounding team during his years there.

:facepalm

And if Kobe takes less shots, other players will have more shots and score points on those possessions instead. Scoring is overrated.

...

[Yao Ming's Foot]

Kobe 5 rings with 1 HOF teammate
Garnett 1 ring with 2 HOF teammates

:confusedshrug:

[the_wise_one]

Nothing.

[Jacks3]

:facepalm

And if Kobe takes less shots, other players will have more shots and score points on those possessions instead. Scoring is overrated.

...
Not the same thing at all.:facepalm

[Bernie Nips]

Kobe 5 rings with 1 HOF teammate
Garnett 1 ring with 2 HOF teammates

:confusedshrug:

Jerry Stackhouse played alongside the GOAT. How come he got no rings?!

Oh wait, it's not just as simple as that.

[M.Bustly15A5RU8]

Not the same thing at all.:facepalm

Someone is mad I just destroyed him.

I only used your own logic.

If Kobe doesn't take as many shots, he gets less field goals. But other players will get more attempts.

Unless you think Kobe's 30+ ppg would just magically disappear.

I guess that team would get blown out almost every game if Kobe disappeared.

[Jacks3]

Someone is mad I just destroyed him.

I only used your own logic.

If Kobe doesn't take as many shots, he gets less field goals. But other players will get more field goals instead.

Unless you think Kobe's 30+ ppg would just magically disappear.

I guess that team would get blown out almost every game if Kobe disappeared.
Comparing points/field-goals to defensive rebounds. SMH.

:facepalm

[Bernie Nips]

Comparing points/field-goals to defensive rebounds. SMH.

:facepalm

Well bud, apparently rebounds mean nothing. They're ALWAYS there for the taking. That's why every year, every single power forward/center for every team puts up insane rebounding stats.

Oh wait, that's crazy... they don't... actually... do... that... only the best rebounders do... wait... wow... your... argument... sucks....

[M.Bustly15A5RU8]

Comparing points/field-goals to defensive rebounds. SMH.

:facepalm

Your argument was stupid and I fired it right back at you. A lot of defensive rebounds could get grabbed by others instead, that's true, just like a lot of Kobe's field goals would be made by others instead if he had less attempts.

[Yao Ming's Foot]

Jerry Stackhouse played alongside the GOAT. How come he got no rings?!

Oh wait, it's not just as simple as that.

:wtf:

[Rysio]

Your argument was stupid and I fired it right back at you. A lot of defensive rebounds could get grabbed by others instead, that's true, just like a lot of Kobe's field goals would be made by others instead if he had less attempts.
creating your own shot is a skill. grabbing rebounds with no one in sight is not.

[Jacks3]

Well bud, apparently rebounds mean nothing. They're ALWAYS there for the taking. That's why every year, every single power forward/center for every team puts up insane rebounding stats.

Oh wait, that's crazy... they don't... actually... do... that... only the best rebounders do... wait... wow... your... argument... sucks....
Did I say rebounding means nothing? :lol

All I'm saying is that individual defensive rebounding is not nearly as important as people think (in the context of the team).

You suck KG stan. :facepalm

[Jacks3]

Your argument was stupid and I fired it right back at you. A lot of defensive rebounds could get grabbed by others instead, that's true, just like a lot of Kobe's field goals would be made by others instead if he had less attempts.
Nope. Grabbing defensive rebounds, which are often uncontested, is much easier than creating and making field-goals/generating points.

[tpols]

Did I say rebounding means nothing? :lol

All I'm saying is that individual defensive rebounding is not nearly as important as people think (in the context of the team).

You suck KG stan. :facepalm
It's definitely easier for a teammate like Derek Fisher or Ron Artest to grab a loose defensive rebound when the whole team has boxed out the opposition than it is for you to, say, put the ball in Artest's or Fisher's hands and tell him to make a bucket.

[Bernie Nips]

Nope. Grabbing defensive rebounds, which are often uncontested, is much easier than creating and making field-goals/generating points.

Perhaps, but how about Kobe's legendary taking-a-contested-shot-even-with-a-teammate-free legacy? His point is valid. Not every rebound is uncontested. Not every shot is the best shot. If Kobe wasn't shooting as much, his teammates' stats would rise. Which is your argument for why KG's stat is so high...

It doesn't take into account the fact that his teammates' are and were so secure in KG's rebounding ability that they could leave him to take the rebound without a second thought, getting themselves into a better offensive position quicker, the luxury that having such a dominant rebounder affords, no no no... all that matters is "another defender could have grabbed that rebound".

Just as another player could have taken that shot.

[Jacks3]

It's definitely easier for a teammate like Derek Fisher or Ron Artest to grab a loose defensive rebound when the whole team has boxed out the opposition than it is for you to, say, put the ball in Artest's or Fisher's hands and tell him to make a bucket.
Exactly. I'm not even saying KG's rebounding isn't a great skill to have. All I'm saying is that people should be more careful how much value they place on those 15 RPG/game numbers.

[Jacks3]

Perhaps, but how about Kobe's legendary taking-a-contested-shot-even-with-a-teammate-free legacy? His point is valid. Not every rebound is uncontested. Not every shot is the best shot. If Kobe wasn't shooting as much, his teammates' stats would rise. Which is your argument for why KG's stat is so high...

It doesn't take into account the fact that his teammates' are and were so secure in KG's rebounding ability that they could leave him to take the rebound without a second thought, getting themselves into a better offensive position quicker, the luxury that having such a dominant rebounder affords, no no no... all that matters is "another defender could have grabbed that rebound".

Just as another player could have taken that shot.
Damn. U real :mad: right now huh?

The fact is, Kobe losing points/TS% of his averages will hurt a lot more than KG losing a few defensive rebounds to teammates. That's a fact. Face it- KG was a major stat-padder. Dude got more uncontested rebounds than anybody in NBA history. Notice how his rebounding dropped off hugely in 08 when he was no longer stat-padding. :pimp:

[Bernie Nips]

Damn. U real :mad: right now huh?

The fact is, Kobe losing points/TS% of his averages will hurt a lot more than KG losing a few defensive rebounds to teammates. That's a fact. Face it- KG was a major stat-padder. Dude got more uncontested rebounds than anybody in NBA history. Notice how his rebounding dropped off hugely in 08 when he was no longer stat-padding. :pimp:

You mean when his minutes dropped to 32 mpg and he was playing with another solid rebounder and excellent interior defender in Perkins? Well spotted bro!

[G-Funk]

give me kobe 7 out of 10 times

[Jacks3]

You mean when his minutes dropped to 32 mpg and he was playing with another solid rebounder and excellent interior defender in Perkins? Well spotted bro!
3+% drop in TRB.

KG= stat-padder.

Is u :mad: ?

[M.Bustly15A5RU8]

Damn. U real :mad: right now huh?

The fact is, Kobe losing points/TS% of his averages will hurt a lot more than KG losing a few defensive rebounds to teammates. That's a fact. Face it- KG was a major stat-padder. Dude got more uncontested rebounds than anybody in NBA history. Notice how his rebounding dropped off hugely in 08 when he was no longer stat-padding. :pimp:

You argued that a lot of rebounds could be grabbed by others instead. And that's correct. I countered that a lot of points could be scored by others instead, which is also correct. The possessions wouldn't just disappear if Kobe Bryant didn't take shots. Then again, if Kobe Bryant stopped scoring and Kevin Garnett stopped rebounding, both teams would hurt. Because they can do it at a higher rate than their teammates. Kobe scores on possessions other teammates wouldn't score on. Kevin Garnett grabs rebounds other teammates wouldn't.

You have one standard for Kevin Garnett and another standard for Kobe Bryant, it seems. Well, if you start analyzing Kevin Garnett's rebounding like that, you gotta analyze all stats like that, also for Kobe Bryant.

[Jacks3]

You argued that a lot of rebounds could be grabbed by others instead. And that's correct. I countered that a lot of points could be scored by others instead, which is also correct. The possessions wouldn't just disappear if Kobe Bryant didn't take shots.
But it's not the same thing. "Replacing" those Kobe points is a lot harder than replacing defensive rebounds.


Then again, if Kobe Bryant stopped scoring and Kevin Garnett stopped rebounding, both teams would hurt. Because they can do it at a higher rate than their teammates.
The Lakers would be hurt more.


You have one standard for Kevin Garnett and another standard for Kobe Bryant, it seems. Well, if you start analyzing Kevin Garnett's rebounding like that, you gotta analyze all stats like that, also for Kobe Bryant.
No, it's two completely different standards. You're talking about points/field-goals,I'm discussing defensive rebounds. Defensive re-bounds are a lot more prone to diminishing returns than points are.

Basically:

Kobe goes to the #1 ORTG team in league.

KG goes to the #1 rebounding team in the league.

Which player will help do more lifting? Kobe easily. Because points don't have the same diminishing returns.

:facepalm

[ballup]

Kobe's larger scoring arsenal and his championships put him ahead of Garnett in most eyes.

What people are forgetting is that Kobe is a wing man while Garnett is a big man. Kobe is expected to be able to score from all ranges while Garnett is expected to score from a much smaller range. The fact that Garnett can stretch the floor gives him an advantage of what he brings to his position. Kobe does bring a post game to to table, but I'm not entirely convinced that it would have more impact to a team than Garnett's midrange jumper.

Also, whenever Garnett was picked for 1st All Defensive Team, was there ever a huge outrage like the ones exhibited in recent years when Kobe is picked for 1st All Defensive Team?

I'm not saying that Garnett is better, I'm just throwing out some things to consider. If there was a fantasy draft, I'd pick Kobe over Garnett unless I was uncertain who else was in the draft.

[amfirst]

KG is just not clutch and aggressive enough to be a number one option. He is a really good number 2 option though. How many times have u seen him will his team to victory as to Kobe?

Even TD being a big man was way more clutch in his prime than KG. He made some really clutch shots during the Kobe/Shaq era.

KG is great but base on the fact that he rather pass the ball to inferior players when the team needs him the most, proves that he is not a 1st option type player. 1st option players have to be good at forcing shots because against good defense ur not going to always get good shots, so u can't pass forever.

[Harison]

KG is just not clutch and aggressive enough to be a number one option. He is a really good number 2 option though. How many times have u seen him will his team to victory as to Kobe?

Even TD being a big man was way more clutch in his prime than KG. He made some really clutch shots during the Kobe/Shaq era.

KG is great but base on the fact that he rather pass the ball to inferior players when the team needs him the most, proves that he is not a 1st option type player. 1st option players have to be good at forcing shots because against good defense ur not going to always get good shots, so u can't pass forever.
If you dont know about the subject, either dont post, or educate yourself, since you have no clue whatsoever :rolleyes: If you want to compare to Duncan, KG shot 21% more than him in the clutch during his peak, you didnt know that?

This year old and a shell of himself KG took over 3 games in the Playoffs, how many Duncan did? None, and he played 3 seasons less than KG. In the '08 Playoffs KG was by far the best 4Q player, and he had two of the most clutch players in NBA on his team - Ray Allen and Pierce.

[Anaximandro1]

Kobe is easily the better player between the two.

KG 's never been a dominant offensive player.He isn't a big man that can score with efficiency nor in high volumes. KG 's field goal percentage is terrible during playoffs,given big man standards,as evidenced by the fact that he shot over 50% from the field for the first and only time in 2003.


Playoffs--Kevin Garnett


1997 17.3 ppg FG 47.1% (Games 3)

1998 15.8 ppg FG 48.0% (Games 5)

1999 21.8 ppg FG 44.3% (Games 4)

2000 18.8 ppg FG 38.5% (Games 4)

2001 21.0 ppg FG 46.6% (Games 4)

2002 24.0 ppg FG 42.9% (Games 3)

2003 27.0 ppg FG 51.4% (Games 6)

2004 24.3 ppg FG 45.2% (Games 18)

2008 20.4 ppg FG 49.5% (Games 26)

2010 15.0 ppg FG 49.5% (Games 23)

2011 14.9 ppg FG 43.9% (Games 9)