Highest Reasonable Ranking for KG

[DFish24]

What do you think is the highest reasonable ranking for KG on the all-time list? Some idiots at realgm were saying he had a case for top 5 ever.

[MichaelCorleone]

top 15.

[Milbuck]

You sure they weren't talking top 5 PF ever?

Anyways, I have these guys ahead of him without a doubt (no order)

MJ
Russell
Kareem
Wilt
Bird
Magic
Kobe
Shaq
Hakeem
Duncan
Lebron
West
Oscar

Then you have guys that are debatable

Dr J
Barkley
Malone
Wade
Dirk
D-Rob
Baylor

It's hard to pick a specific number, but I guess the absolute highest ranking I could give him would be #14. Overall though he's anywhere from 14-20 for me.

[MichaelCorleone]

My ranking:

1. Michael Jordan
2. Bill Russell
3. Magic Johnson
4. Larry Bird
5. Tim Duncan
6. Lebron James
7. Shaquille O'Neal
8. Kareem Abdul Jabbar
9. Wilt Chamberlain
10. Hakeem Olajuwon
11. John Havlicek
12. Scottie Pippen
13. Kobe Bryant
14. Dirk Nowitzki
15. Kevin Garnett

[Akrazotile]

You sure they weren't talking top 5 PF ever?

Anyways, I have these guys ahead of him without a doubt (no order)

MJ
Russell
Kareem
Wilt
Bird
Magic
Kobe
Shaq
Hakeem
Duncan
Lebron
West
Oscar

Then you have guys that are debatable

Dr J
Barkley
Malone
Wade
Dirk
D-Rob
Baylor

It's hard to pick a specific number, but I guess the absolute highest ranking I could give him would be #14. Overall though he's anywhere from 14-20 for me.


Everyone on your debatable list is better than kobe

[aj1987]

My ranking:

1. Michael Jordan
2. Bill Russell
3. Magic Johnson
4. Larry Bird
5. Tim Duncan
6. Lebron James
7. Shaquille O'Neal
8. Kareem Abdul Jabbar
9. Wilt Chamberlain
10. Hakeem Olajuwon
11. John Havlicek
12. Scottie Pippen
13. Kobe Bryant
14. Dirk Nowitzki
15. Kevin Garnett
This literally is the WORST list EVER.

[DFish24]

You sure they weren't talking top 5 PF ever?



Positive. There is a thread on their player comparisons board where some are arguing him for top 5 all-time OVERALL. Talk about being overrated.

[MichaelCorleone]

This literally is the WORST list EVER.
What's wrong with my list? I think it's pretty damn accurate and fair.

[aj1987]

What's wrong with my list? I think it's pretty damn accurate and fair.
LeBron over Shaq? Pippen, Dirk, and KG in the top 15? KAJ outside the top 3 and Kobe at #13.

[fpliii]

That would be me. Didn't say I'd put him there, just said he has a fringe case (I don't care at all about accolades, just ability and level of play).

[MichaelCorleone]

fpliii what do you think of my list? Please give constructive criticisms.

[fpliii]

fpliii what do you think of my list? Please give constructive criticisms.
What's your criteria? Mine is just the order in which I'd take players in an all-time draft (for the record, I had KG at 9th in that thread, though the list wasn't in an exact order).

As long as you're consistent in what you value, I don't have any problem.

[DFish24]

That would be me. Didn't say I'd put him there, just said he has a fringe case (I don't care at all about accolades, just ability and level of play).

Just curious, where do you have Bill Russell on your list since you don't care about accolades?

[MichaelCorleone]

What's your criteria? Mine is just the order in which I'd take players in an all-time draft (for the record, I had KG at 9th in that thread, though the list wasn't in an exact order).

As long as you're consistent in what you value, I don't have any problem.
If we don't take into account accolades then Kobe Bryant wouldn't even be top 50 on my list.:eek:

[Pointguard]

14 is the highest I go.

But he could be top 5 in all around game, tho.
Wilt, Oscar, Jordan, Duncan, KG in no order.

I know I'm missing somebody.

[Warfan]

Found this from the thread i think you're talking about


Looking at his career in the most favorable light you have a player who had a monster peak, great longevity and made a massive impact on his teams despite being in the roughest situation of any player in NBA history. I don't think you can take him over Jordan who had a higher peak and longer prime, KAJ much longer primer or Russell who dominated his era but beyond those 3 I think you can rank him over any player in NBA history.



Pretty much this. I honestly think MJ and Russell are a cut above the rest, then you have Kareem, then it's a massive cluster-eff after that. I'd have KG closer to 10 than 4, but there is legitimate arguments for any of those guys.



i agree with this the most. i too would have kg closer to 10 than 4 but he has a legit argument as a top 5 player after mj/russell/KAJ. id have him right next to duncan and magic in that group.

so yeah highest reasonable ranking would be 4th while personally i would put him somewhere between 5th-8th.

:roll: :roll:

I pretty much agree with milbuck

[fpliii]

Just curious, where do you have Bill Russell on your list since you don't care about accolades?
I don't have a list, but I'm not sure. He had the GOAT impact defensively and maybe overall, here are the relative ORtg/DRtg:


Here are the ORtg/DRtg numbers relative to league averages:


Team O D pO pD
57 BOS -0% 6% -0% 6%
58 BOS -1% 6% -2% 8%
59 BOS 0% 6% -1% 10%
60 BOS 2% 6% -2% 10%
61 BOS -3% 8% 2% 10%
62 BOS -0% 9% -3% 9%
63 BOS -2% 9% -4% 8%
64 BOS -4% 12% -4% 15%
65 BOS -3% 11% -4% 11%
66 BOS -3% 8% 3% 5%
67 BOS 2% 5% -7% 9%
68 BOS -1% 5% 2% 4%
69 BOS -2% 7% 4% 6%

First two are regular season, final two are playoffs. Higher positive number is better.

The offenses were mediocre at best, and other than Russ, who was a great defender on those teams?

It comes down to how well you'd think today. If you think he'd translate 100%, he'd have to be the GOAT. If not, somewhat lower obviously.

FWIW I do care about championships (with full context, of course), just not about MVPs/all-NBA/all-star selections etc.

[DFish24]

If we don't take into account accolades then Kobe Bryant wouldn't even be top 50 on my list.:eek:

What criteria would you use that would keep Kobe outside the Top 50?

[fpliii]

If we don't take into account accolades then Kobe Bryant wouldn't even be top 50 on my list.:eek:
lol that's a bit unreasonable. Kobe's one of the 3 most skilled players in NBA history. It's fun citing FG%, but he's a dominant mid-range and post scorer, both of which you need to win titles as an offensive player.

[DFish24]

I don't have a list, but I'm not sure. He had the GOAT impact defensively and maybe overall, here are the relative ORtg/DRtg:



It comes down to how well you'd think today. If you think he'd translate 100%, he'd have to be the GOAT. If not, somewhat lower obviously.

FWIW I do care about championships (with full context, of course), just not about MVPs/all-NBA/all-star selections etc.

Ok, was assuming that you included championships under the category accolades.

[MichaelCorleone]

What criteria would you use that would keep Kobe outside the Top 50?
Not counting accolades, Kobe Bryant is at best a healthy Gilbert Arenas. All style no substance scoring with no team play.

[fpliii]

Ok, was assuming that you included championships under the category accolades.
Oh obviously not lol, the point is to win as many championships as possible, and the players that help you do that the most would have to be the best.

[DFish24]

Not counting accolades, Kobe Bryant is at best a healthy Gilbert Arenas. All style no substance scoring with no team play.

:biggums:

[bizil]

14 is the highest I go.

But he could be top 5 in all around game, tho.
Wilt, Oscar, Jordan, Duncan, KG in no order.

I know I'm missing somebody.

I agree. That's the thing KG will be known as. KG is likely the most versatile big man (PF or C) ever in terms of all facets of the game. That's KG's legacy and that saying a whole lot. Bron has it on lock for perimeter guys and KG has it on lock of the bigs. So I can see KG anywhere 14-20 GOAT wise. He redefined the PF spot in a major, major way. Likely moreso than anybody ever.

[SamuraiSWISH]

He's in the Malone, Barkley, Dirk tier

[houston]

KG top 20 for sure

[Black Mamba's B]

Not counting accolades, Kobe Bryant is at best a healthy Gilbert Arenas. All style no substance scoring with no team play.
You can't be serious? Even the Dragon would disagree with you

[kshutts1]

I have him in the second tier. With my tiers, that equates to roughly the 8-12/13 range.

Same tier as Duncan, for what it's worth.

[T_L_P]

Top 1-5: Jordan, Magic, Kareem, Duncan, Bird
Top 6-10: Russell, Shaq, Hakeem, Wilt, Kobe
Top 11-15: LeBron, West, Moses, Garnett, Oscar


So yes, top 15 is reasonable.

[kshutts1]

I agree. That's the thing KG will be known as. KG is likely the most versatile big man (PF or C) ever in terms of all facets of the game. That's KG's legacy and that saying a whole lot. Bron has it on lock for perimeter guys and KG has it on lock of the bigs. So I can see KG anywhere 14-20 GOAT wise. He redefined the PF spot in a major, major way. Likely moreso than anybody ever.

Do you work for the NBA, and that's why you fail to mention Wilt? lol.

[alexd]

Top 11 in no order
mj,Kareem,bird,Shaq,Dr j,wilt,russel,Duncan,cousy,big o,maravich
before anyone starts arguing I put these players in the top ten cause they all had impact on the game and made it what it is today.yeah cousy did what all the 10 years old can do now but he was the first to do it.i don t tend to compare players from different eras due to the game evolving as the players evolve etc.i mean if you put wilt (the exact player he was)today he would be something like Dwight.yeah he s huge and strong but couldn t shoot to save his life.him and russel were great athletes,but u can t tell me they got pure fundamentals etc.but for their era yeah they were the goats.and you can t tell hey man they would train too as players do now and they would be even more dominant etc cause that s a big if,what if they got injured etc etc.too many variables
players you could swap any order u want based on preferences after the top 11
hakeem,kg,Kobe,lebron(he can crack top 10,but we must wait to end his career)bailor,Hondo etc

[SexSymbol]

Top 15 is a reach, more like top 20. And that's only if you have some bias for him

[Demitri98]

top 15:

1. Jordan
2. KAJ
3. Russell

Big gap

4. Magic
5. Bird

Gap

6. Wilt
7. Shaq
8. Kobe
9. Duncan
10. Hakeem

Gap

11. Jerry West
12. Dr J
13. Pippen
14. KG
15. Dirk

Moses Malone, Bob Pettit and (dare I say it on this board) LeBron also have a case for 12-15 IMO.

[T_L_P]

top 15:

1. Jordan
2. KAJ
3. Russell

Big gap

4. Magic
5. Bird

Gap

6. Wilt
7. Shaq
8. Kobe
9. Duncan
10. Hakeem

Gap

11. Jerry West
12. Dr J
13. Pippen
14. KG
15. Dirk

Moses Malone, Bob Pettit and (dare I say it on this board) LeBron also have a case for 12-15 IMO.


Pippen but no Moses :biggums:

[Demitri98]

Pippen but no Moses :biggums:

Moses Malone, Bob Pettit, and (dare I say it on this board) LeBron also have a case for 12-15 IMO.Which means you could easily replace anyone in 12-15 with any of those 3 and I wouldn't really argue much.

[Bob Dole]

top 15:

1. Jordan
2. KAJ
3. Russell

Big gap

4. Magic
5. Bird

Gap

6. Wilt
7. Shaq
8. Kobe
9. Duncan
10. Hakeem

Gap

11. Jerry West
12. Dr J
13. Pippen
14. KG
15. Dirk

Moses Malone, Bob Pettit and (dare I say it on this board) LeBron also have a case for 12-15 IMO.

One of the worst lists I have ever seen. Not even because of the order(even though that is really bad and pippen isnt even a top 35 player) but because of the arbitrary and utterly ridiculous gaps that are in there.

Please never talk about basketball ever again.

[Duderonomy]

Top 35-40 :oldlol: at top 15.

[riseagainst]

If we don't take into account accolades then Kobe Bryant wouldn't even be top 50 on my list.:eek:

:roll:

[Milbuck]

Pippen has no business being in the top 15. Great player, but let's slow down.

[Cold soul]

Top 15 at best case scenario, but 20 is more reasonable.

[K Xerxes]

If we focus on individual ability on the court, his highest reasonable ranking is where Tim Duncan is. I think they peaked at a very similar level tbh, Duncan was just more fortunate with the teams around him. However, there may well be some leadership and intangibles at play here leading the Spurs to win so much more, so Duncan would always get the edge in my book anyway.

KG has a case for top 10 IMO, definitely top 15. He has a case for GOAT defender in all honesty and could up in the mid 20s PPG at his best.

[ImKobe]

My ranking:

1. Michael Jordan
2. Bill Russell
3. Magic Johnson
4. Larry Bird
5. Tim Duncan
6. Lebron James
7. Shaquille O'Neal
8. Kareem Abdul Jabbar
9. Wilt Chamberlain
10. Hakeem Olajuwon
11. John Havlicek
12. Scottie Pippen
13. Kobe Bryant
14. Dirk Nowitzki
15. Kevin Garnett

puke.gif

[BoutPractice]

Like Dirk, he's somewhere between 15 and 25. Top 10 is very much a reach. I guess you could justify it if you used only one, highly specific criterion that makes KG look better than he otherwise would, but you could do that for many other players.

I also question that advanced stats tell you the whole story about impact. Just comparing Dirk and KG here... It's an obvious comparison because they played the same position in the same conference and had mostly overlapping primes with a below average supporting cast. Yet although they were both in somewhat similar situations, Dirk never missed the playoffs (despite changing coaches several times), won 50 games or so about as many times in a row as Duncan until last year (iirc) almost won the title in 2006 with a team that frequently started Adrian Griffin and led a team heavily reliant on non-contract year Erick Dampier to 67 wins in 2007. Past his peak, he carried offensively a team with no other all-star to the title in 2011, facing and outplaying an absurd number of future HOFers. Contrast with KG who missed the playoffs several times, and only won a title when he had not one but two genuine offensive stars surrounding him. You could say Dirk needed Tyson Chandler (which, again, I question because they win that Heat series most of the time in 2006, also known as "the year where DeSagana Diop was considered relevant") but KG definitely did need both Paul Pierce and Ray Allen.

Of course, you could say that KG's cast was slightly worse - and make no mistake: it was bad- and yet something tells me that Dirk could take just about team to the playoffs in the West (heck, some might say he's doing it again - the West is ridiculously crowded this year, and although I love Monta, Carter, Dalembert and all the others the cold hard truth is that most Mavs other than Dirk are either average or below average at their position), and that he could make more out of the same casts KG had. Regardless of DRTG. Amusingly, the reason I think Dirk's impact is underrated is the same reason fliip thinks Kobe's is (even though, while the "source" of the impact is similar, there is less hard evidence for it).

[houston]

Garnett never was a true level franchise player.

[Doranku]

Garnett never was a true level franchise player.
:biggums: :biggums: :biggums:

MVP
DPOY
4x All-NBA 1st Team
9x All-Defensive 1st Team
15x NBA All-Star

Show me one other guy in NBA history with those kind of individual accolades that isn't a true franchise player.

[BoutPractice]

Also, I do think remarkable games and playoff performances do matter to a player's legacy - first because they actually do matter empirically in terms of how they shift fan opinions, and secondly because I believe they actually show you something, that this player has a kind of "extra gear" they can activate in the crucial moments. You might say this puts consistent players at a disadvantage, but even Tim Duncan, who supposedly is the epitome of consistency, has several memorable big games and big shots.

For Garnett, I can think of one really good playoff performance in 2004, and that's it. Keeping with my previous comparison, when you think of Dirk ten or twenty years from now (putting general playoffs stats aside, although they make him look really good indeed), people are going to be able to point to him exploding for 50 on the Suns, eviscerating the Thunder with an absurdly efficient 48, leading an unexpected fourth quarter come back with tough shot after tough shot on the way to another 40 point performance against the same Thunder, and his game winners in the Finals. When they make the documentary they can show footage of about a dozen regular season clutch shots, as pure filler.

Or if we want to compare Garnett to a more defensive minded player, Bill Russell has his 30/40 Game 7 in the Finals, and this general reputation as an "extra gear" kind of player.

It's that whole "anecdote" thing. Plays a huge part in sports mythology. "I remember when Kevin Garnett"... what?

[Artillery]

He's not a strong enough playoff performer to be a top ten all-time player. Wherever Robinson is, that's where KG is.

[Harison]

He's not a strong enough playoff performer to be a top ten all-time player. Wherever Robinson is, that's where KG is.

Yeah, and KG's prime Playoffs numbers mirror Duncans, another "not a strong enough playoff performer"? :lol

[Yankstar]

Everyone on your debatable list is better than kobe

Why do you people exist? :biggums:

[eklip]

Yeah, and KG's prime Playoffs numbers mirror Duncans, another "not a strong enough playoff performer"? :lol
No they don't.

Duncan had 5 postseasons with a PER of 27+ (31.8 was his best), he also had 5 seasons with WS/48 over .200 (.279 was his best).

Garnett highest PER was 25.5 (3 games against DAL). He had one season with WS/48 over .200 (.255 in 4 games). Garnett was very inefficient on offense in his prime and also not very efficient with Boston where he wasn't the go-to scorer.

Even Duncan's career averages aren't really worse than Garnett's best playoff seasons. Duncan is an all-time great playoff performer in terms of statistics and success.

[Bandito]

If we don't take into account accolades then Kobe Bryant wouldn't even be top 50 on my list.:eek:
Who are your top 5 sg not counting accolades?

[Jlamb47]

Yeah, and KG's prime Playoffs numbers mirror Duncans, another "not a strong enough playoff performer"? :lol
Dude your an idiot. Duncan sh1ts on KG
KG even knows this

[Harison]

No they don't.

Duncan had 5 postseasons with a PER of 27+ (31.8 was his best), he also had 5 seasons with WS/48 over .200 (.279 was his best).

Garnett highest PER was 25.5 (3 games against DAL). He had one season with WS/48 over .200 (.255 in 4 games). Garnett was very inefficient on offense in his prime and also not very efficient with Boston where he wasn't the go-to scorer.

Even Duncan's career averages aren't really worse than Garnett's best playoff seasons. Duncan is an all-time great playoff performer in terms of statistics and success.

Do you really want to use PER? :lol

Garnett vs Duncan, Playoffs, prime years and as primary scoring options:

KG (01-04): 24,1 PPG, 15,3 TRB, 4,9 AST, 1,4 STL, 1,8 BLK, @ 47% FG, 73% FT.

TD (01-07): 24,3 PPG, 12,8 TRB, 3,8 AST, 0,7 STL, 2,8 BLK, @ 50% FG, 70% FT.

Scoring volume was almost the same, Garnett was rebounding, assisting and stealing way more, while Duncan was blocking more and was more efficient, while KG had better FT.

If anything, data suggests KG was better, and on top of that he was better defender too, read up:

https://asubstituteforwar.wordpress.com/2011/04/23/howard-is-the-dpoy-but-hes-no-garnett/

If we take the most impressive Playoffs series instead:

Best series:
Duncan '02: 27.6/14.4/5.0 with FG% 45.3
Duncan '03: 24.7/15.4/5.3 with FG% 52.9

Garnett '03: 27.0/15.7/5.2 with FG% 51.4
Garnett '04: 24.3/14.6/5.1 with FG% 45.2

You can pretty much swap their best Playoffs performances, how similar their were, I'm not even including Garnett's 24.0/18.7/5.0 series.

Nobody is questioning Duncan has more accolades, however its also directly tied to the team and one of the best coaches of All-time. Not everyone has a chance to be in such fortunate situation, and any common sense person keeps it in mind when comparing success.

[BIZARRO]

fpliii what do you think of my list? Please give constructive criticisms.

I will (IMO).

This alone; there is no universe, this or any other, where Scottie Pippen is a better basketball player than Kobe Bryant. No way.

And I'm from Chicago, watched almost every game of their run, love Pip, and all things Bulls. But no way. Not in a million years is he better than Kobe was.

And Hondo ahead of Kobe, really? Really?


Anyway, my list would be way different, but to each his own. It's just those two stuck way out reading it.

Take care man and all the best. :cheers:

[T_L_P]

Do you really want to use PER? :lol

Garnett vs Duncan, Playoffs, prime years and as primary scoring options:

KG (01-04): 24,1 PPG, 15,3 TRB, 4,9 AST, 1,4 STL, 1,8 BLK, @ 47% FG, 73% FT.

TD (01-07): 24,3 PPG, 12,8 TRB, 3,8 AST, 0,7 STL, 2,8 BLK, @ 50% FG, 70% FT.

Scoring volume was almost the same, Garnett was rebounding, assisting and stealing way more, while Duncan was blocking more and was more efficient, while KG had better FT.

If anything, data suggests KG was better, and on top of that he was better defender too, read up:

https://asubstituteforwar.wordpress.com/2011/04/23/howard-is-the-dpoy-but-hes-no-garnett/

If we take the most impressive Playoffs series instead:

Best series:
Duncan '02: 27.6/14.4/5.0 with FG% 45.3
Duncan '03: 24.7/15.4/5.3 with FG% 52.9

Garnett '03: 27.0/15.7/5.2 with FG% 51.4
Garnett '04: 24.3/14.6/5.1 with FG% 45.2

You can pretty much swap their best Playoffs performances, how similar their were, I'm not even including Garnett's 24.0/18.7/5.0 series.

Nobody is questioning Duncan has more accolades, however its also directly tied to the team and one of the best coaches of All-time. Not everyone has a chance to be in such fortunate situation, and any common sense person keeps it in mind when comparing success.

Duncan played three times as many Playoff games as Garnett from that period. The fact that Duncan's stats are even close to Garnett's there is a miracle :oldlol:

And no, I don't agree that Garnett was a better defender. More versatile? Absolutely, but Duncan was more of a game changer on the defensive end of the floor, because of his rim protection.

Also, why would you post the steals and blocks stats in the first part of your post and not the second?

If we do use all of the data, their Playoff peaks look more like this:

Duncan '02: 27.6 PPG / 14.4 RPG / 5.0 APG / 0.7 SPG / 4.3 BPG / .550 TS%
Garnett '03: 27.0 PPG / 15.7 RPG / 5.2 APG / 1.7 SPG / 1.7 BPG / .539 TS%

Duncan '03: 24.7 PPG / 15.4 RPG / 5.3 APG / 0.6 SPG / 3.3 BPG / .577 TS%
Garnett '04: 24.3 PPG / 14.6 RPG / 5.1 APG / 1.3 APG / 2.3 BPG / .513 TS%

Just look at Pop's record before Duncan got there...and then remind yourself of how many titles he's won since Duncan's decline. Duncan's intangibles as a leader and his adaptability is what puts him ahead of Garnett as a player.

[Harison]

Duncan played three times as many Playoff games as Garnett from that period. The fact that Duncan's stats are even close to Garnett's there is a miracle :oldlol:

Why it would be a miracle if its prime vs prime as a primary scoring options?

If we take individual series, we get the very same extremely close numbers, clutch data too. So no, its not game-number dependent as you imply. Yet somehow Duncan is way better... just because. Cant show it in data, but hey - there is PER for the rescue :D



And no, I don't agree that Garnett was a better defender. More versatile? Absolutely, but Duncan was more of a game changer on the defensive end of the floor, because of his rim protection.

Its not enough to say "rim protector = better", it doesnt work like this. Personally you can pick any area and say you think its better, and then to back up your opinion you have to pull up advanced stats, or anything more tangible than "x is better than y, just because."

Let me know when you have data in line of:
https://asubstituteforwar.wordpress.com/2011/04/23/howard-is-the-dpoy-but-hes-no-garnett/

or this:
http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=308314



Also, why would you post the steals and blocks stats in the first part of your post and not the second?

If we do use all of the data, their Playoff peaks look more like this:

Duncan '02: 27.6 PPG / 14.4 RPG / 5.0 APG / 0.7 SPG / 4.3 BPG / .550 TS%
Garnett '03: 27.0 PPG / 15.7 RPG / 5.2 APG / 1.7 SPG / 1.7 BPG / .539 TS%

Duncan '03: 24.7 PPG / 15.4 RPG / 5.3 APG / 0.6 SPG / 3.3 BPG / .577 TS%
Garnett '04: 24.3 PPG / 14.6 RPG / 5.1 APG / 1.3 APG / 2.3 BPG / .513 TS%

Because I had best series data from another subscribed thread, thanks for pulling more info :applause:

To get even better context of the best series by both players, we can compare same year vs same opponent, i.e. Lakers '03.

Duncan: 28.0/11.8/4.8/0.3/1.3, FG% 52.9
Garnett: 27.0/15.7/5.2/1.7/1.7, FG% 51.4

If you have any objectiveness, you will agree Garnett played better, or at the very least not worse than Duncan in his legendary series.



Just look at Pop's record before Duncan got there...and then remind yourself of how many titles he's one since Duncan's decline. Duncan's intangibles as a leader and his adaptability is what puts him ahead of Garnett as a player.

Pop had less than one season before Duncan, and Spurs were tanking since Robinson was injured and Spurs wanted to draft TD, and yet you hold it against Pop? :no: Even with declined Duncan, Spurs play like a Swiss clock, and every year overachieve, thats more on Pop than Duncan.

There are a lot of intangibles, and if anything KG has an edge there either (communication in defense, changing priorities of other star players, while you could say showing example on and off court is a draw), most of the intangibles seen in Spurs primarily come from Pop. I havent heard of Duncan installing his culture, or star players coming forward and saying Duncan changed how they view and play basketball.

[T_L_P]

Why it would be a miracle if its prime vs prime as a primary scoring options?

If we take individual series, we get the very same extremely close numbers, clutch data too. So no, its not game-number dependent as you imply. Yet somehow Duncan is way better... just because. Cant show it in data, but hey - there is PER for the rescue :D

Because, we're talking about two very different sample sizes. It is obviously harder to maintain that kind of production over 130 games than it is 31 games. :confusedshrug:

Also, I hope you realise that I am not the original person you responded to. I never once said Duncan is way better. In fact, I said his intangibles put him over the edge (and thus I think he's only slightly better).


Its not enough to say "rim protector = better", it doesnt work like this. Personally you can pick any area and say you think its better, and then to back up your opinion you have to pull up advanced stats, or anything more tangible than "x is better than y, just because."

Let me know when you have data in line of:
https://asubstituteforwar.wordpress.com/2011/04/23/howard-is-the-dpoy-but-hes-no-garnett/

or this:
http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=308314

I honestly can't be bothered to pull up the defensive stats right now, but I am only talking about Minnesota Garnett here, because that's where he played during his peak/prime. I do agree that Boston Garnett was probably a better defender than Duncan. :cheers:



Because I had best series data from another subscribed thread, thanks for pulling more info :applause:

To get even better context of the best series by both players, we can compare same year vs same opponent, i.e. Lakers '03.

Duncan: 28.0/11.8/4.8/0.3/1.3, FG% 52.9
Garnett: 27.0/15.7/5.2/1.7/1.7, FG% 51.4

If you have any objectiveness, you will agree Garnett played better, or at the very least not worse than Duncan in his legendary series.

Ah, no problem.

I'd say their series' against the Lakers were about even. Remember, Duncan did win his series against the Lakers, whereas Garnett didn't. And it's not like we can boil that one down to teammates. The two had very comparable help in that series.


Pop had less than one season before Duncan, and Spurs were tanking since Robinson was injured and Spurs wanted to draft TD, and yet you hold it against Pop? :no: Even with declined Duncan, Spurs play like a Swiss clock, and every year overachieve, thats more on Pop than Duncan.

There are a lot of intangibles, and if anything KG has an edge there either (communication in defense, changing priorities of other star players, while you could say showing example on and off court is a draw), most of the intangibles seen in Spurs primarily come from Pop. I havent heard of Duncan installing his culture, or star players coming forward and saying Duncan changed how they view and play basketball.

I can excuse the first season record because the Spurs were more-or-less tanking, but I can't say we didn't have the roster to win in some of the seasons after Duncan's fourth championship ('07). Manu and Parker were both excellent in '08.

I personally think Duncan's leadership style has worked much better than Garnett's. Duncan did a lot to develop his rookies, even when they flat-out sucked ('03 Tony Parker was not a pretty sight). As far as Duncan installing his culture, all you need to do is watch one of the many interviews with Duncan's teammates. They all say he sets the example. He wants to be coached, and because of that everybody else does too (I think Robert Horry said that). He's a more encouraging leader than Garnett too (just look at the Big Baby incident).

[eklip]

Do you really want to use PER? :lol
PER is just a way to rate statistics, which is definitely better than your way, because Hollinger actually put more thought into it. It may not show who the better player is, but the player with the higher PER usually is the player with the better stats (per min). WS/48 is another way.

TS% under .520 is very inefficient and it can even hurt the team, especially if it's the percentage of the main scorer. Garnett's playoff career average is .524 TS% and even worse before he went to Boston.

[moaz]

:biggums: :biggums: :biggums:

MVP
DPOY
4x All-NBA 1st Team
9x All-Defensive 1st Team
15x NBA All-Star

Show me one other guy in NBA history with those kind of individual accolades that isn't a true franchise player.

He just did :confusedshrug: : KG

[Jailblazers7]

I think right around number 20. I don't think there is any way that I could have him cracking my top 15.

[Anaximandro1]

Highest Reasonable Ranking for KG ??

Robinson and Dirk > KG



Yeah, and KG's prime Playoffs numbers mirror Duncans, another "not a strong enough playoff performer"? :lol

Duncan/Shaq DESTROY Garnett statiscally. Peak, prime or career.

1) Peak

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-O7kxhV4Wp-Q/Uym8-KABLEI/AAAAAAAACrQ/-z_6Y089ttU/s1600/1.jpg


2) Prime

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-HROW4938UqM/Uym8-P4KXTI/AAAAAAAACrk/4GmFJ2cRzbc/s1600/2.jpg

3) Prime

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Gh1VvH3HOiY/Uym8-D6o91I/AAAAAAAACrU/3ZooBvuC9rE/s1600/3.jpg

4) Career

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ou_jCze8vjs/Uym8-pgXh8I/AAAAAAAACrg/n0yjqgispe8/s1600/4.jpg

[Jailblazers7]

Honestly, the only reason people are willing to call KG a top 15 player is because of his Boston years. Without those, he probably gets lumped in with Patrick Ewing.

[Pointguard]

Also, I do think remarkable games and playoff performances do matter to a player's legacy - first because they actually do matter empirically in terms of how they shift fan opinions, and secondly because I believe they actually show you something, that this player has a kind of "extra gear" they can activate in the crucial moments. You might say this puts consistent players at a disadvantage, but even Tim Duncan, who supposedly is the epitome of consistency, has several memorable big games and big shots.

For Garnett, I can think of one really good playoff performance in 2004, and that's it. Keeping with my previous comparison, when you think of Dirk ten or twenty years from now (putting general playoffs stats aside, although they make him look really good indeed), people are going to be able to point to him exploding for 50 on the Suns, eviscerating the Thunder with an absurdly efficient 48, leading an unexpected fourth quarter come back with tough shot after tough shot on the way to another 40 point performance against the same Thunder, and his game winners in the Finals. When they make the documentary they can show footage of about a dozen regular season clutch shots, as pure filler.

Or if we want to compare Garnett to a more defensive minded player, Bill Russell has his 30/40 Game 7 in the Finals, and this general reputation as an "extra gear" kind of player.

It's that whole "anecdote" thing. Plays a huge part in sports mythology. "I remember when Kevin Garnett"... what?

Best defense since the hand check era? Best communicator? One of the best team defenders ever? Most versatile PF ever? Only player with x points, x rebounds, x assist, x blocks never mind a dploy to go along with it.

There are only a few fans know Bill Russell had the 30/40 game, so that doesn't fly. Walt Frazier had 36 point 19 assist 7 rebound in the final of a championship game to close out Jerry West and Wilt. It rarely gets brought up here.

I hope fans, like yourself, will recognize more than just points at some point.
Garnett did have a 32 point 21 rebound with 13 straight points in the fourth quarter while holding Chris Webber down to 16 points for the game.

[ProfessorMurder]

Honestly, the only reason people are willing to call KG a top 15 player is because of his Boston years. Without those, he probably gets lumped in with Patrick Ewing.

The only reason people are willing to call Kobe a top ten player are because of his Shaq years.

We got a chance to see what a past his prime KG could do with a good team. Extrapolate it and look at his talent, he's a top 20 player.

[Jailblazers7]

The only reason people are willing to call Kobe a top ten player are because of his Shaq years.

We got a chance to see what a past his prime KG could do with a good team. Extrapolate it and look at his talent, he's a top 20 player.

Yeah, I know it isn't fair to take away a player's championship years like I was suggesting but I just wanted to point out how slim the margin for error is when people make these lists. The difference between KG's career and Ewing's is incredibly slim yet no one ever suggests that Ewing is top 20.

Personally, I think KG is right around 20 so I wouldn't argue against anyone who has him on either side of that number. I don't think I could go as far as top 15 for him tho.

[swagga]

http://s3-ec.buzzfed.com/static/enhanced/terminal05/2012/5/21/12/enhanced-buzz-24446-1337618230-0.jpg

[longhornfan1234]

1. MJ
2. Wilt
3. Kareem
4. Magic
5. Russell
6. Bird
7. Shaq
8. Kobe
9. Duncan
10. LeBron
11. Hakeem
12. Moses
13. West
14. Oscar
15. Dr. J
16. Baylor
17. Barkley
18. Admiral
19. Thomas
20. KG/Malone

I have him at 20 tied with Malone. He's so hard for me to decide between them.

[Pointguard]

1. MJ
2. Wilt
3. Kareem
4. Magic
5. Russell
6. Bird
7. Shaq
8. Kobe
9. Duncan
10. LeBron
11. Hakeem
12. Moses
13. West
14. Oscar
15. Dr. J
16. Baylor
17. Barkley
18. Admiral
19. Thomas
20. KG/Malone

I have him at 20 tied with Malone. He's so hard for me to decide between them.
Good list!

[tpols]

Honestly, the only reason people are willing to call KG a top 15 player is because of his Boston years. Without those, he probably gets lumped in with Patrick Ewing.

So why does KG get no credit for the few years he was on a good team but Duncan and Shaq get to play on good teams their whole careers?

[Pointguard]

So why does KG get no credit for the few years he was on a good team but Duncan and Shaq get to play on good teams their whole careers?
I think his goal was that we only compare players on their worse teams? I don't know where he was going with that.

[Jailblazers7]

So why does KG get no credit for the few years he was on a good team but Duncan and Shaq get to play on good teams their whole careers?

I explained myself literally like 5 posts up. :lol

[Pointguard]

Yeah, I know it isn't fair to take away a player's championship years like I was suggesting but I just wanted to point out how slim the margin for error is when people make these lists. The difference between KG's career and Ewing's is incredibly slim yet no one ever suggests that Ewing is top 20.

Personally, I think KG is right around 20 so I wouldn't argue against anyone who has him on either side of that number. I don't think I could go as far as top 15 for him tho.
The difference between 15 and 20 could be in the rankings of your powerforwards. They seem to come into play between 15 and 20.

[Jailblazers7]

The difference between 15 and 20 could be in the rankings of your powerforwards. They seem to come into play between 15 and 20.

Yeah, that could def be the case because they all get bunched up once you get past Duncan. I'd have Pettit in my top 20 for sure too and he seems to get left out of most people's top 20.

[Odinn]

He has no case over players like Moses, Big O, The Logo, Baylor which are 10-15 range. And that means 16 or any lower spot is good/enough for him.

[Dbrog]

He has no case over players like Moses, Big O, The Logo, Baylor which are 10-15 range. And that means 16 or any lower spot is good/enough for him.

I would argue he does have a case over Baylor. Baylor never won a chip whereas KG was instrumental in his. I mean, I can't really blame Baylor since he was against Russell and Wilt, but KG's longevity let him get past Duncan/Shaq which could be another argument in KG's favor. Yes, Baylor was basically mini-Bron, but KG was just as unique with his ballhandling skills. That said, I actually have KG as 18 or 19 on my list. Lots of other greats just had better runs than he did. Barkley is the only one without a ring that I rank ahead of him though.

[Deuce Bigalow]

My ranking:

1. Michael Jordan
2. Bill Russell
3. Magic Johnson
4. Larry Bird
5. Tim Duncan
6. Lebron James
7. Shaquille O'Neal
8. Kareem Abdul Jabbar
9. Wilt Chamberlain
10. Hakeem Olajuwon
11. John Havlicek
12. Scottie Pippen
13. Kobe Bryant
14. Dirk Nowitzki
15. Kevin Garnett
:lol

[tpols]

:lol
I like how he overrated Pippen to take an indirect shot at MJ, while simultaneously overrating bran and underrating Kobe.

Nice multi-layered troll post

[bizil]

I think in terms of size and versatility, I believe KG, Bron, Magic, and Barkley are the most unique players in that sense of all the greats. Name another 7 footer who comes close to KG's mix of freak athletic ability and versatility across ALL FACETS! Scoring, defense, passing, and rebounding. Keep in mind The Ticket at his peak led the L in boards multiple times, was capable of defending big swingmen all the way to center very good to great, had point forward kind of skills, and ALSO get u 24 a night. That shit is UNHEARD of for a 7 footer. I'm not saying he's better than other bigs like Kareem, Wilt, Shaq, Duncan, or Hakeem. But I will say FOR SURE none of them were as versatile and great as in many facets as KG. That in itself is something KG as on all big men, even if he doesn't rank as high as those guys historically. I think KG is EASILY a top 20 player. It just depends on how high in the 20 he is. I would say 15-20 is fair.

[kobeef24]

Probably have him somewhere in the 15-20 range. It's not really too set for me after the first 7 or so though.

[kshutts1]

1. MJ
2. Wilt
3. Kareem
4. Magic
5. Russell
6. Bird
7. Shaq
8. Kobe
9. Duncan
10. LeBron
11. Hakeem
12. Moses
13. West
14. Oscar
15. Dr. J
16. Baylor
17. Barkley
18. Admiral
19. Thomas
20. KG/Malone

I have him at 20 tied with Malone. He's so hard for me to decide between them.

Where is Pettit?

[Myth]

My ranking:

1. Michael Jordan
2. Bill Russell
3. Magic Johnson
4. Larry Bird
5. Tim Duncan
6. Lebron James
7. Shaquille O'Neal
8. Kareem Abdul Jabbar
9. Wilt Chamberlain
10. Hakeem Olajuwon
11. John Havlicek
12. Scottie Pippen
13. Kobe Bryant
14. Dirk Nowitzki
15. Kevin Garnett

:roll:

[Rocketswin2013]

1. Jordan
2. Kareem
3. Magic
4. Bird
5. Shaq
6. Wilt
7. LeBron
8. Hakeem
9. Robinson
10. Kobe
11. Duncan
12. Pettit
13. Robertson
14. West
15. Barkley
16. K. Malone
17. Garnett
18. Dr J
19. Stockton
20. Dirk/CP3/Durant/Wilkins/Nash/Iverson

[T_L_P]

1. Jordan
2. Kareem
3. Magic
4. Bird
5. Shaq
6. Wilt
7. LeBron
8. Hakeem
9. Robinson
10. Kobe
11. Duncan
12. Pettit
13. Robertson
14. West
15. Barkley
16. K. Malone
17. Garnett
18. Dr J
19. Stockton
20. Dirk/CP3/Durant/Wilkins/Nash/Iverson

Even worse than the list that had Scottie Pippen ahead of Kobe

David Robinson :facepalm

[Rocketswin2013]

Even worse than the list that had Scottie Pippen ahead of Kobe

David Robinson :facepalm
Peak Robinson was 2nd to none at his position in the 90's.

[fpliii]

Peak Robinson was 2nd to none at his position in the 90's.
Are you jtatranch from ESPN?

[T_L_P]

Peak Robinson was 2nd to none at his position in the 90's.

And that means he should be top 10, above guys like Duncan?

Robinson had like 11 elite years, and his two titles are all-but owed to Duncan.

Forget that, his Playoff averages before he got inured (22/12/3/1/3 over 80 or so games) are not much better than Duncan's career Playoff averages :roll:

And then you have Chris Paul and 'Nique in or around the top 20.

[Rocketswin2013]

And that means he should be top 10, above guys like Duncan?

Robinson had like 11 elite years, and his two titles are all-but owed to Duncan.

Forget that, his Playoff averages before he got inured (22/12/3/1/3 over 80 or so games) are not much better than Duncan's career Playoff averages :roll:

And then you have Chris Paul and 'Nique in or around the top 20.
Wilkins was an honorable mention because all things considered, he was one hell of a basketball player.

Chris Paul throughout his career has been a consistent best at his position, and this is arguably the deepest and best the PG position has ever been. Not to mention his peak is HOF level, and statistically and production wise he's had DPOY nominee level seasons, WHILE having seasons where you could legit say he is the most productive offensive player in the league. He's never had a great team around him and this year he does, so we'll see how it goes. He's better than Dirk IMO.

And Robinson was a great, great player , and simply more productive than Duncan. Don't know what else to say.

[Uncle Drew]

My ranking:

1. Michael Jordan
2. Bill Russell
3. Magic Johnson
4. Larry Bird
5. Tim Duncan
6. Lebron James
7. Shaquille O'Neal
8. Kareem Abdul Jabbar
9. Wilt Chamberlain
10. Hakeem Olajuwon
11. John Havlicek
12. Scottie Pippen
13. Kobe Bryant
14. Dirk Nowitzki
15. Kevin Garnett
ROFL

[Rocketswin2013]

Are you jtatranch from ESPN?
No.

[T_L_P]

Wilkins was an honorable mention because all things considered, he was one hell of a basketball player.

Chris Paul throughout his career has been a consistent best at his position, and this is arguably the deepest and best the PG position has ever been. Not to mention his peak is HOF level, and statistically and production wise he's had DPOY nominee level seasons, WHILE having seasons where you could legit say he is the most productive offensive player in the league. He's never had a great team around him and this year he does, so we'll see how it goes. He's better than Dirk IMO.

And Robinson was a great, great player , and simply more productive than Duncan. Don't know what else to say.

Again, how was D. Rob more productive when his best stretch of Playoff basketball was barely better than Duncan's entire career worth?

Robinson was the clear #2 in '99, then he wasn't even one of the three best players in '03. Duncan has been the best player on four title teams. The fact that you even think Robinson is better than Duncan is laughable.

And then you have Shaq 6 places higher than Duncan, when he won the same number of titles throughout his career with more help.

[T_L_P]

You're talking about the playoffs, where their stats mirrored each other, but there's another important season and Prime Robinson blows Duncan out regular season wise. Shaq was better than Duncan IMO, defensively, Duncan had a slight edge but Shaq had a bigger edge on offense.

Had Duncan been on a team with Prime Robinson, he wouldn't have been winning those MVP's, Robinson would have had them all. Robinson was better on defense and offense by a legit margin.

Playoffs mean a whole lot more than the Regular Season, it's just that simple. And if we just take Duncan's best Playoff years (as I did for Robinson), his production would be better (about 25/13/4/3, and that's playing 50 more games). Duncan would not have won the MVPs, sure, but he would have won the Finals MVPs, which arguably means more. And surely longevity means something? There's no way Robinson's thirteen NBA seasons (10-11 elite) are worth more than Duncan's sixteen (12 elite).

I have no problem if someone said they'd take Shaq over Duncan, but there's no way they can be a whole six places apart. Like I said, Duncan won as many titles and Finals MVPs as Shaq, in less seasons with less help. And I think Duncan has a clear edge on defense. Duncan is one of the greatest defenders ever. I never thought of Shaq as even an elite defender. :confusedshrug:

[Y2ktors]

D-Rob was a better player than Duncan. This should not Even be debatable.

[T_L_P]

D-Rob was a better player than Duncan. This should not Even be debatable.

What do you mean exactly?

Robinson definitely was more gifted, but Duncan was more impactful, when things really mattered. The fact of the matter is without Duncan Robinson would not be talked about anywhere near the top twenty.

[rmt]

Do you really want to use PER? :lol

Garnett vs Duncan, Playoffs, prime years and as primary scoring options:

KG (01-04): 24,1 PPG, 15,3 TRB, 4,9 AST, 1,4 STL, 1,8 BLK, @ 47% FG, 73% FT.

TD (01-07): 24,3 PPG, 12,8 TRB, 3,8 AST, 0,7 STL, 2,8 BLK, @ 50% FG, 70% FT.

Scoring volume was almost the same, Garnett was rebounding, assisting and stealing way more, while Duncan was blocking more and was more efficient, while KG had better FT.

Don't you realize that you used a time span for Duncan that is twice as long as for KG and that that longer span is harder to maintain these stats.


If anything, data suggests KG was better, and on top of that he was better defender too, read up:

https://asubstituteforwar.wordpress.com/2011/04/23/howard-is-the-dpoy-but-hes-no-garnett/

Again, the data in this article leaves out prime Duncan years when he won 2 rings, 2 MVPs, 2 FMVPs, 6 all-nba 1st teams, 5 all-defensive 1st teams and 1 all-defensive 2nd team. Using limited data (years that favor KG and leave out TD's best) is hardly proof that he was a better defender.


If we take the most impressive Playoffs series instead:

Best series:
Duncan '02: 27.6/14.4/5.0 with FG% 45.3
Duncan '03: 24.7/15.4/5.3 with FG% 52.9

Garnett '03: 27.0/15.7/5.2 with FG% 51.4
Garnett '04: 24.3/14.6/5.1 with FG% 45.2

You can pretty much swap their best Playoffs performances, how similar their were, I'm not even including Garnett's 24.0/18.7/5.0 series.

Nobody is questioning Duncan has more accolades, however its also directly tied to the team and one of the best coaches of All-time. Not everyone has a chance to be in such fortunate situation, and any common sense person keeps it in mind when comparing success.

Not all of his accolades are team-oriented. He would have gotten most of those all-nba and all-defensive honors on another team - even more so because his stats (e.g. rebounds) would be higher not sharing with DRob.

Fact is that Duncan came into the league NBA-ready and KG decided to come in as a teenager. Part of the package is the decisions that KG made such as coming in early and staying in MIN so long.

[Y2ktors]

What do you mean exactly?

Robinson definitely was more gifted, but Duncan was more impactful, when things really mattered. The fact of the matter is without Duncan Robinson would not be talked about anywhere near the top twenty.
I'm only talking on a skill level. On film D-Rob was most definitely the better individual player....who actually didn't have a system, like Tim, that allowed him to have more team success and consistency.