Kevin Garnett or Chris Webber?

[QUOTE=bokes15]If you're just looking at the guy on paper, his scoring numbers are misleading. Webber was a very unselfish player and would have no problem adjusting to a smaller scoring role, I strongly believe that.

C-Webb was a better offensive player than Kevin Garnett, and while his defense was not exactly on par with KG's, it wasn't bad either. I agree that there would be a dropoff but he's not exactly a guy who got exposed on the defensive end of the floor. I think he would fit seemlessly into the offensive schemes and defensively he wouldn't be a liability. I guess I can't make a definitive argument that they would still have won, but I think there would be a strong possibility. And who says they'd have to implement the exact same system? CW is a completely different player from KG.[/QUOTE]

I think you misundersood me. Like you, I think that Webber would have fit into Boston's offensive schemes in a similar way to Garnett (I believe I said as much in my last post). But in order to fit that offensive scheme, Webber could not have produced anywhere near the 27 ppg that you reference from that one season in his prime, as in order to do so he would have required way too many possessions that would have weakened the offense.

And actually, the stance that Webber was a "better offensive player" than KG is extremely questionable. KG has a higher true shooting percentage, a higher EFG%, a higher assist percentage, a lower turnover percentage, and a higher offensive rating than Webber both peak and over career. Webber has a higher usage. The upshot of all of these stats is that Garnett has been the more efficient offensive player than Webber (both peak and career), but Webber tended to take more shots and use more possessions. Now, all of these numbers were relatively close one way or the other, but the trend is clear.

So all of that said, it goes back to my original point: on offense, Webber would likely have fit into the Celtics' scheme similarly to KG with similar offensive results. But in this situation, KG's better efficiency and shooting was probably a more valuable skill than Webber's ability to volume score (which, if anything, would have been a negative to the Big Three scheme).

Then, we get to defense, which was really the more important side of the ball anyway for the Celtics' championship. Webber was an underrated defensive player IMO, but KG is a defensive game-changer, one of the best defenders in this generation. The Celtics needed more than just "not a defensive liability" from their power forward...they needed a defensive lynchpin, one that could anchor the most important unit on the team. They needed a gamechanger, one that they could use as the foundation of the #1 defense in the NBA. Webber just wasn't that.

Thus my conclusion is that if Webber was similar to (or even slightly less efficient/higher volume than) KG on offense but lesser on defense, and even WITH KG the Celtics went 7 games and down to the wire against the Cavs...it is not likely IMO that they make it through with Webber in there instead. It would have been just another chapter in Webber's legacy of leading extremely talented teams right to the brink, but not quite making it over.

KG for me took full advantage of his opportunities. Chris Webbber had his chance with that great Sacramento team. Which consisted of prime Bibby, Peja in his prime, Divac, Bobby Jackson, Hedo, and he still didn't manage to win a tittle.

So I would choose KG.

[QUOTE=browntown]KG for me took full advantage of his opportunities. Chris Webbber had his chance with that great Sacramento team. Which consisted of prime Bibby, Peja in his prime, Divac, Bobby Jackson, Hedo, and he still didn't manage to win a tittle.

So I would choose KG.[/QUOTE]
The fact that people are legitimately comparing Peja Stojakovic (at any point in his career) to Paul Pierce is laughable.
Pierce>>>>>> Peja
Perkins >>>>> out of prime Divac that C-Webb played with
Rondo >>>Bobby Jackson
Ray Allen >>>> Hedo Turkoglu
And lastly, the Kings ran into prime Shaq and Kobe repeatedly during these great chances of which everyone speaks about.

[QUOTE=FinishHim!]
Rondo >>>Bobby Jackson[/QUOTE]

Don't want to stray out of topic too much but no, no, no. In his day, there was nothing Rondo was better than BJax in. Outside of rebounding or some other inconsequential stat when comparing the two. Not as a play maker, not as a scorer, and not even as a defender. Bobby checked Kobe at times and did a decent job when they played each other. In fact, I think Bobby did a better job d'ing up Kobe than Doug did. Rondo is nothing more to me than a slightly better Anthony Carter. I can name you 15 PGs I'd take over him.

[quote]Perkins >>>>> out of prime Divac that C-Webb played with[/quote]

No. Get out of here.

[QUOTE=wang4three]Don't want to stray out of topic too much but no, no, no. In his day, there was nothing Rondo was better than BJax in. Outside of rebounding or some other inconsequential stat when comparing the two. Not as a play maker, not as a scorer, and not even as a defender. Bobby checked Kobe at times and did a decent job when they played each other. In fact, I think Bobby did a better job d'ing up Kobe than Doug did. Rondo is nothing more to me than a slightly better Anthony Carter. I can name you 15 PGs I'd take over him. [/QUOTE]
Rondo's getting underrated here. He's a better passer and closer to being a "pure" pg than Jackson. Jackson was a lot better scorer but Rondo beats him as a passer and penetrator. Jackson was still a better overall player, but he doesn't blow Rondo away.

[QUOTE=Real Men Wear Green]Rondo's getting underrated here. He's a better passer and closer to being a "pure" pg than Jackson. Jackson was a lot better scorer but Rondo beats him as a passer and penetrator. Jackson was still a better overall player, but he doesn't blow Rondo away.[/QUOTE]

I don't see how Rondo's underrated still. I never understood that claim. He's a solid point guard. No better than Chris Duhon or TJ Ford. I also think that Bobby was a lot better penetrator than Bobby. When he was the 6th man of the year he was blowing by anyone and everyone put in front of him. People were saying he was better than a prime Bibby. Passer? Probably, but as far as making plays are concerned, I think Bobby has him beat.

[QUOTE=wang4three][quote=Real Men Wear Green]

Rondo's getting underrated here. He's a better passer and closer to being a "pure" pg than Jackson. Jackson was a lot better scorer but Rondo beats him as a passer and penetrator. Jackson was still a better overall player, but he doesn't blow Rondo away.[/quote]

I don't see how Rondo's underrated still. I never understood that claim. He's a solid point guard. No better than Chris Duhon or TJ Ford. I also think that Bobby was a lot better penetrator than Bobby. When he was the 6th man of the year he was blowing by anyone and everyone put in front of him. People were saying he was better than a prime Bibby. Passer? Probably, but as far as making plays are concerned, I think Bobby has him beat.[/QUOTE]

Not to step too far into the disagreement, but I think you're both ignoring a major point here in responding to FinishHim's in depth analysis:

You're comparing the starter on the Celtics to the back-up on the Kings. FinishHim did the same thing at swingman, where he compares the starter on the Celtics (Allen) with the back-up on the Kings (Hedo). He somehow managed to get all of those >>>>>>>>>>s in there without mentioning at all the starting backcourt for those Kings in Bibby and Christie, who were only the best defensive player on the team (Christie) and best clutch scorer (and possibly 2nd best player) in Bibby. :shrugs: Just seems like they might be pertinent to this discussion too.

[QUOTE=drza44]Not to step too far into the disagreement, but I think you're both ignoring a major point here in responding to FinishHim's in depth analysis:

You're comparing the starter on the Celtics to the back-up on the Kings. FinishHim did the same thing at swingman, where he compares the starter on the Celtics (Allen) with the back-up on the Kings (Hedo). He somehow managed to get all of those >>>>>>>>>>s in there without mentioning at all the starting backcourt for those Kings in Bibby and Christie, who were only the best defensive player on the team (Christie) and best clutch scorer (and possibly 2nd best player) in Bibby. :shrugs: Just seems like they might be pertinent to this discussion too.[/QUOTE]

I was aware, but I found Rondo over Bobby and Perkins over Vlade just egregious.

Actually, I wasn't in the mood to argue with a bunch of ">."
[QUOTE=wang4three]I don't see how Rondo's underrated still. I never understood that claim. He's a solid point guard. No better than Chris Duhon or TJ Ford. I also think that Bobby was a lot better penetrator than Bobby. When he was the 6th man of the year he was blowing by anyone and everyone put in front of him. People were saying he was better than a prime Bibby. Passer? Probably, but as far as making plays are concerned, I think Bobby has him beat.[/QUOTE]
I don't see how anyone that has watched Rondo could doubt him as a penetrator. There isn't a player in the game that can stay in front of him. And it's funny that you bring up Bibby...Bibby started over Jackson and yet Rondo has destroyed Bibby, who is the same player now that he was in Sac (he's still only 30 and the stats are on par with career averages).

[QUOTE]There isn't a player in the game that can stay in front of him.[/QUOTE]
An even greater testament to his slashing ability is the fact that almost every defender he goes up against sags off him, trying to bait him into taking an uncomfortable jumper. And he still gets by them.

[QUOTE=Kobe=MVP07`]The argument can be made that KG has a ring to Cwebs 0

that can be defended that if cwebb had kgs cast of pierce ray ect.. he too would of won it
and would of won it with his old cast if the refs didnt **** him

Kg or cwebb prime who do u take to start a team?[/QUOTE]

Garnett

end thread!

[QUOTE=browntown]KG for me took full advantage of his opportunities.[/quote]

Apparently not that often in the first round, and not when he made the WCF.

[quote]Chris Webbber had his chance with that great Sacramento team. Which consisted of prime Bibby, Peja in his prime, Divac, Bobby Jackson, Hedo, and he still didn't manage to win a tittle. [/quote]

He lost in what many view as the worst officiated playoff series ever. Kings played poorly, no doubt, and I'm not hanging the loss entirely on the stripes, but that has to count for something. Again, he was injured the VERY NEXT YEAR in the PLAYOFFS. How unlucky is that? KG has a TIME advantage that Webber didn't get. I don't see how KG not having a career killing injury means he's better.

If KG wasn't dealt and won in Boston, is this even a point that is brought up?

[QUOTE=Real Men Wear Green]Actually, I wasn't in the mood to argue with a bunch of ">."

I don't see how anyone that has watched Rondo could doubt him as a penetrator. There isn't a player in the game that can stay in front of him. And it's funny that you bring up Bibby...Bibby started over Jackson and yet Rondo has destroyed Bibby, who is the same player now that he was in Sac (he's still only 30 and the stats are on par with career averages).[/QUOTE]

He can penetrate, but his finishing ability is very iffy to me. I've seen him blow the simplest of layups. Bibby didn't start over Bobby for defensive reasons. You know that. Mike is a horrible defensive player so telling me that someone "destroyed" him is not really saying much. It's like telling me Rondo destroyed Nash. Well, yeah of course. Mike's upside came from his ability to play off Webber and Vlade so well.

[QUOTE=wang4three]He can penetrate, but his finishing ability is very iffy to me. I've seen him blow the simplest of layups. Bibby didn't start over Bobby for defensive reasons. You know that. Mike is a horrible defensive player so telling me that someone "destroyed" him is not really saying much. It's like telling me Rondo destroyed Nash. Well, yeah of course. Mike's upside came from his ability to play off Webber and Vlade so well.[/QUOTE]
Rondo not only lit Bibby up, he also defended him well on the other end. In fact, Rondo has outplayed a lot of good pgs head-to-head. As for the lay-ups, Rondo has improved in that area greatly and it's certainly not an issue to make a big deal over, because if he can't finish, how is a 6'1 pg with a weak jumper shooting 50%?

[QUOTE=wang4three]Don't want to stray out of topic too much but no, no, no. In his day, there was nothing Rondo was better than BJax in. Outside of rebounding or some other inconsequential stat when comparing the two. Not as a play maker, not as a scorer, and not even as a defender. Bobby checked Kobe at times and did a decent job when they played each other. In fact, I think Bobby did a better job d'ing up Kobe than Doug did. Rondo is nothing more to me than a slightly better Anthony Carter.[B] I can name you 15 PGs I'd take over him. [/B]



No. Get out of here.[/QUOTE]

I don't ant this thread going off line but i doubt you can name 15 pg's ahead of Rondo. Rondo is probably a 2nd tier/3rd tier PG but to name 15 you would have to be picky and name 5-7 PG's within those same tier ahead of them. Many of those PG's you can make a solid argument that Rondo has the advantage however slight it is.