Replace KG with Duncan on the Spurs

drza.

i respect your opinion, but now your shifting the focus a little and twisting my words.

i'm not saying kg was inept in late games. again. i'm not saying he was. but he has been at times.....and he has been more times than duncan.

you seem to fail to even acknowledge simple facts:

1. duncan was a better low post player
2. duncan was a better rim protector and defensive anchor in paint
3. duncan was a better man to man defender on the low block
4. duncan's playoff and regular season numbers are slightly better
5. overall the advanced stats slightly favor duncan
6. duncan was more efficient in the playoffs

some strong opinions i have:

1. duncan was better suited to take over a playoff game in the 2nd half and when the game got tight. why? because he wasn't the facilitator that kg was. and again. i don't even really consider this much of an advantage for duncan, but it relates back to duncan winning in 03 (which is the debate in this thread). and that spurs team needed a player to take over and dominate in order to win....and that is what duncan provided.


you are having a hard time comprehending a few things. its ok. but listen. when someone says "kg's inept play at times"....that does not mean they are saying that he is inept. you need to understand that for purposes of this debate and any debate. you can't use that to go off on a tangent about kg's play late in games. the simple matter is in my opinion kg disappeared late in games more often than duncan. that does not mean kg was a bad late game player....he clearly was not. but compared to duncan, he was worse imo.

"dirk destroyed kg at times"...uhhhhhh....he did. thats just a fact. again. i'm not saying dirk is better. not saying that is a reason why duncan is better. i'm simply pointing out something that happened in kg's elite years. and here is the difference. kg should have been better suited to stop dirk. but he couldn't really stop him (especially in the 02 playoffs).

"duncan took over more playoff games" again....fact. nothing to dispute here. are there potential reasons why? of course. but again...thats just a fact. duncan dominated more in the playoffs as evidenced by his superior career playoff numbers. again...is that my only reason? nope.

see. at some point you need to acknowledge a few of the things duncan just did better. i could flip your constant "well kg never had this or that or never had the opportunity for this or that" stuff with the following:

duncan's numbers on worse teams would skyrocket. his usage would go up and his shot attempts would go up. he'd carry more of the load so all his numbers across the board would destroy kg's if he was in kg's situation. you see? we can both play that game. imagine what duncan would do if he was playing on .500 teams. he increase his output a ton.

so again. what wins in the playoffs? defense and rebounding.

and duncan was a better rebounder than kg in the playoffs.
and i think duncan had a bigger overall impact on defense in the playoffs? again. why? because he was a better interior anchor/paint protector and he could defend other bigs one on one a bit better.

so we have two players we both agree that are very similar.

duncan has proven more often he can dominate in the playoffs and has more of an ability to take over games.

duncan is a better low post player that can get you easier baskets (as evidenced by duncan's better efficiency). there is also more to this. duncan can get other bigs in foul trouble and wear them out a bit on the low block to an extent kg really couldn't and rarely did.

duncan was a better defensive anchor.

i'll take duncan. like i said a thousand times i agree with almost everything you say, but you are under-rating duncan's ability to control a game and seriously over-rating kg's willingness to take over games. in the right situation....kg's game would do better than duncan's. but if i had to choose one to build a team around? i take duncan because i know he can be that guy that dominates consistently and has no qualms getting the ball play in play out on the low block. and that is how i prefer to play the game.

[FONT="Comic Sans MS"][COLOR="RoyalBlue"]We'll give you Jamison for either[/COLOR][/FONT] :cheers:

[url]http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=37w7q3h[/url]
[url]http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=3xm2emx[/url]

[QUOTE=tpols]What? Their scoring averages and efficiencies are nearly identical in the playoffs and regular seasons during their primes. That literally makes no sense. Garnett was every bit the scorer duncan was. And his ability to anchor a defense was just as good too. Just look at what he's transformed this boston team into. These guys are neck and neck as individual players.[/QUOTE]Your insane especially about the defense.:facepalm

KG is great but Duncan is noticably better.....its really not very close,even as great as KG is.

[QUOTE=ginobli2311]
see. at some point you need to acknowledge a few of the things duncan just did better. i could flip your constant "well kg never had this or that or never had the opportunity for this or that" stuff with the following:

duncan's numbers on worse teams would skyrocket. his usage would go up and his shot attempts would go up. he'd carry more of the load so all his numbers across the board would destroy kg's if he was in kg's situation. you see? we can both play that game. imagine what duncan would do if he was playing on .500 teams. he increase his output a ton. [/quote]

There are things that both did better than the other, nobody in this thread ever said KG was categorically better. Duncan numbers wouldn't skyrocket on a worse team. On bad teams without structure like Minny, they would just collapse on a single good player. Duncan's FG% would decrease, his rebounding would decrease, his team wouldn't channel players into him for blocks, his feeds in the post would be worse, the double on him would be quicker and his morale down a bit.

When you play in a structured system like Duncan its harder to double him. When you have guys that can create their own shot and finish like Gin and Parker, its harder to double. Bowen, Mario Ellie, Gin and Steve kerr were hitting that outside shot, its harder to double. When you have guys quick off the dribble like Sean Elliot, Claxton, Steven Jackson and Parker, its harder to double. You have leaders like Avery Johnson and David Robeson you have better disciplined players, its harder to double you.

Wally and Hudson never factored heavy in opposing teams scouting reports and they always missed a lot of games. Rod Strickland, Cassell and Sprewell were all over 33 years of age when they played with KG and in their last years. KG was key to getting 90% of the players off that weren't older players in the league. Like I stated before, Minny's upper office was so bad that SA stold Nesterovic because KG made him look better than he was. He wasn't the same player in SA. TD is an easier double target because he wasn't as versatile as KG offensively and was going to be on certain sweet spots on the floor.

In a more structered offense KG learns to be in the low post more often. I say this because KG developed his game as much as anybody in the league ever, and did so without the benefit of a mentor, college or good managment. KG always had the strength to play in the post. He would have had the speed, agility and handle advantage there as well. But his training grounds was in Minny. Spilt milk so I won't go there. But no, I don't think TD becomes better on Minny.

You bring up Dirk a lot but I recall Joe Smith on Dirk a lot and KG on Howard most of the time. They were protecting KG because Dirk was running behind screens all the time. I don't think that's a fair call out if you seen the games. KG has outplayed Dirk in H2H competition, even outscoring him along with the rebounds, assist blocks and steals. And a guy can get hot behind screens and a short playoff series. Definitely not a fair call out. I wouldn't even call it an exception to the rule. I would call Amare, Duncan's exception to the rule. He has done it more than once to TD and since Amare became of age he has the advantage on Duncan in H2h comp too - well in points.
[quote]
so again. what wins in the playoffs? defense and rebounding.
and duncan was a better rebounder than kg in the playoffs. [/quote]
Once again, structure verses no structure in the rebounding department. KG had the responsibility of getting his teammates off and playing the role of set-up man. He was frequently out of position to rebound, yet in his prime he is definitely a better rebounder in the regular season and at least an equal rebounder in the playoffs. If KG had a true powerforward role for his team and wasn't responsible for keeping Wally's man out of the paint as well, KG unquestionably outrebounds TD. [quote]

and i think duncan had a bigger overall impact on defense in the playoffs? again. why? because he was a better interior anchor/paint protector and he could defend other bigs one on one a bit better. [/quote]
I agree here. This is most certainly true for most of their careers. But you have to take into account that KG anchored one of the best defenses ever. Tho past his prime, teams could not get in the paint when he was in the back calling shifts and angles. This defense is superior than the at the rim defense (see the layup line Kobe and teammates execute on SA in '08 and then the harsh Laker reality they get with Boston). There was no SA team equal to Boston's defense in '08 and SA had a more experienced coach and better defensive pieces in a lot of years. Something that KG was denied because of Minny's neglect. I also give KG the defensive edge because he communicates better than TD. Defense at the rim is not the way to play defense.
[quote]
duncan is a better low post player that can get you easier baskets (as evidenced by duncan's better efficiency). there is also more to this. duncan can get other bigs in foul trouble and wear them out a bit on the low block to an extent kg really couldn't and rarely did.
[/quote]
True [quote]
duncan was a better defensive anchor.[/quote] not when KG joined a franchise of equal stature. So not when their defensive games peaked.
[quote]
i'll take duncan. like i said a thousand times i agree with almost everything you say, but you are under-rating duncan's ability to control a game and seriously over-rating kg's willingness to take over games. in the right situation....kg's game would do better than duncan's. but if i had to choose one to build a team around? i take duncan because i know he can be that guy that dominates consistently and has no qualms getting the ball play in play out on the low block. and that is how i prefer to play the game.[/QUOTE]
I can see your point but you are talking to Drza.

[QUOTE=ginobli2311]drza.

i respect your opinion, but now your shifting the focus a little and twisting my words.

i'm not saying kg was inept in late games. again. i'm not saying he was. but he has been at times.....and he has been more times than duncan.

you seem to fail to even acknowledge simple facts:

1. duncan was a better low post player
2. duncan was a better rim protector and defensive anchor in paint
3. duncan was a better man to man defender on the low block
4. duncan's playoff and regular season numbers are slightly better
5. overall the advanced stats slightly favor duncan
6. duncan was more efficient in the playoffs

some strong opinions i have:

1. duncan was better suited to take over a playoff game in the 2nd half and when the game got tight. why? because he wasn't the facilitator that kg was. and again. i don't even really consider this much of an advantage for duncan, but it relates back to duncan winning in 03 (which is the debate in this thread). and that spurs team needed a player to take over and dominate in order to win....and that is what duncan provided.


you are having a hard time comprehending a few things. its ok. but listen. when someone says "kg's inept play at times"....that does not mean they are saying that he is inept. you need to understand that for purposes of this debate and any debate. you can't use that to go off on a tangent about kg's play late in games. the simple matter is in my opinion kg disappeared late in games more often than duncan. that does not mean kg was a bad late game player....he clearly was not. but compared to duncan, he was worse imo.

"dirk destroyed kg at times"...uhhhhhh....he did. thats just a fact. again. i'm not saying dirk is better. not saying that is a reason why duncan is better. i'm simply pointing out something that happened in kg's elite years. and here is the difference. kg should have been better suited to stop dirk. but he couldn't really stop him (especially in the 02 playoffs).

"duncan took over more playoff games" again....fact. nothing to dispute here. are there potential reasons why? of course. but again...thats just a fact. duncan dominated more in the playoffs as evidenced by his superior career playoff numbers. again...is that my only reason? nope.

see. at some point you need to acknowledge a few of the things duncan just did better. i could flip your constant "well kg never had this or that or never had the opportunity for this or that" stuff with the following:

duncan's numbers on worse teams would skyrocket. his usage would go up and his shot attempts would go up. he'd carry more of the load so all his numbers across the board would destroy kg's if he was in kg's situation. you see? we can both play that game. imagine what duncan would do if he was playing on .500 teams. he increase his output a ton.

so again. what wins in the playoffs? defense and rebounding.

and duncan was a better rebounder than kg in the playoffs.
and i think duncan had a bigger overall impact on defense in the playoffs? again. why? because he was a better interior anchor/paint protector and he could defend other bigs one on one a bit better.

so we have two players we both agree that are very similar.

duncan has proven more often he can dominate in the playoffs and has more of an ability to take over games.

duncan is a better low post player that can get you easier baskets (as evidenced by duncan's better efficiency). there is also more to this. duncan can get other bigs in foul trouble and wear them out a bit on the low block to an extent kg really couldn't and rarely did.

duncan was a better defensive anchor.

i'll take duncan. like i said a thousand times i agree with almost everything you say, but you are under-rating duncan's ability to control a game and seriously over-rating kg's willingness to take over games. in the right situation....kg's game would do better than duncan's. but if i had to choose one to build a team around? i take duncan because i know he can be that guy that dominates consistently and has no qualms getting the ball play in play out on the low block. and that is how i prefer to play the game.[/QUOTE]

Great post!

[QUOTE=Pointguard]There are things that both did better than the other, nobody in this thread ever said KG was categorically better. Duncan numbers wouldn't skyrocket on a worse team. On bad teams without structure like Minny, they would just collapse on a single good player. Duncan's FG% would decrease, his rebounding would decrease, his team wouldn't channel players into him for blocks, his feeds in the post would be worse, the double on him would be quicker and his morale down a bit.

When you play in a structured system like Duncan its harder to double him. When you have guys that can create their own shot and finish like Gin and Parker, its harder to double. Bowen, Mario Ellie, Gin and Steve kerr were hitting that outside shot, its harder to double. When you have guys quick off the dribble like Sean Elliot, Claxton, Steven Jackson and Parker, its harder to double. You have leaders like Avery Johnson and David Robeson you have better disciplined players, its harder to double you.

Wally and Hudson never factored heavy in opposing teams scouting reports and they always missed a lot of games. Rod Strickland, Cassell and Sprewell were all over 33 years of age when they played with KG and in their last years. KG was key to getting 90% of the players off that weren't older players in the league. Like I stated before, Minny's upper office was so bad that SA stold Nesterovic because KG made him look better than he was. He wasn't the same player in SA. TD is an easier double target because he wasn't as versatile as KG offensively and was going to be on certain sweet spots on the floor.

In a more structered offense KG learns to be in the low post more often. I say this because KG developed his game as much as anybody in the league ever, and did so without the benefit of a mentor, college or good managment. KG always had the strength to play in the post. He would have had the speed, agility and handle advantage there as well. But his training grounds was in Minny. Spilt milk so I won't go there. But no, I don't think TD becomes better on Minny.

You bring up Dirk a lot but I recall Joe Smith on Dirk a lot and KG on Howard most of the time. They were protecting KG because Dirk was running behind screens all the time. I don't think that's a fair call out if you seen the games. KG has outplayed Dirk in H2H competition, even outscoring him along with the rebounds, assist blocks and steals. And a guy can get hot behind screens and a short playoff series. Definitely not a fair call out. I wouldn't even call it an exception to the rule. I would call Amare, Duncan's exception to the rule. He has done it more than once to TD and since Amare became of age he has the advantage on Duncan in H2h comp too - well in points.

Once again, structure verses no structure in the rebounding department. KG had the responsibility of getting his teammates off and playing the role of set-up man. He was frequently out of position to rebound, yet in his prime he is definitely a better rebounder in the regular season and at least an equal rebounder in the playoffs. If KG had a true powerforward role for his team and wasn't responsible for keeping Wally's man out of the paint as well, KG unquestionably outrebounds TD.
I agree here. This is most certainly true for most of their careers. But you have to take into account that KG anchored one of the best defenses ever. Tho past his prime, teams could not get in the paint when he was in the back calling shifts and angles. This defense is superior than the at the rim defense (see the layup line Kobe and teammates execute on SA in '08 and then the harsh Laker reality they get with Boston). There was no SA team equal to Boston's defense in '08 and SA had a more experienced coach and better defensive pieces in a lot of years. Something that KG was denied because of Minny's neglect. I also give KG the defensive edge because he communicates better than TD. Defense at the rim is not the way to play defense.

True not when KG joined a franchise of equal stature. So not when their defensive games peaked.

I can see your point but you are talking to Drza.[/QUOTE]

Again, great post.

I actually enjoy reading two intelligent posts on thise topic.

IMHO, I would take either player in a heartbeat. I have long been a fan of Duncan, but the more I read and research on KG, the more impressed that I have become.

[QUOTE=jlauber]Again, great post.

I actually enjoy reading two intelligent posts on thise topic.

IMHO, I would take either player in a heartbeat. I have long been a fan of Duncan, but the more I read and research on KG, the more impressed that I have become.[/QUOTE]

yea.

i'm actually a bigger fan of kg. i love kg. i just think duncan was ever so slightly better. its why i have kg so high all time....he simply was too close to duncan in terms of level of play and impact to be ranked more than 5 to 7 spots behind him on any list.

kg was amazing and still is. its a real shame we never to see elite kg play with elite talent. he could have torn up the the league for an 8 year stretch in the right situation.

[QUOTE=ginobli2311]yea.

i'm actually a bigger fan of kg. i love kg. i just think duncan was ever so slightly better. its why i have kg so high all time....he simply was too close to duncan in terms of level of play and impact to be ranked more than 5 to 7 spots behind him on any list.

kg was amazing and still is. its a real shame we never to see elite kg play with elite talent. he could have torn up the the league for an 8 year stretch in the right situation.[/QUOTE]

As much as most all of us probably enjoy ranking the all-time greats, I have personally decided (maybe a New Year's resolution) to discontinue that philosophy. There have just been so many great players in the history of the NBA.

For instance, many here believe that Hakeem owned Robinson, based on their playoff battle in mid-90's. However, they faced each other 42 times in the regular season, and IMHO, the numbers show almost a complete draw...

[url]http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/h2h_finder.cgi?request=1&p1=robinda01&p2=olajuha01[/url]

And, to be honest, I think that if most of the great players, and in their primes, played against each other, there would probably be very little difference. Some were better offensive players, to be sure, while others were better defenders. Some were more efficient than others, while some had better range. Some were better rebounders, and some were better passers. And some, like Russell and Duncan, probably elevated the play their teammates better than others. But, overall, these top tier players would all be great. And given the right surrounding personnel (and here again, it would probably be a different criteria for each), they would probably all be winners and champions.

So, for me at least, I am just going to provide a little history in my major posts, but I will try to refrain from disparaging any other great players in the process.

I would always marvel on how goddamn skilled these players were back in their primes and their still a joy to watch today. I watched the Celtics game on Christmas game and KG looked unstoppable even while guarded by Dwight Howard, even in his post injury state. Timmy certainly has slowed down but I still believe he will be a force in the playoffs as he always has been.

Wouldn't it be great to see the two go against each other in the finals this coming June?

[QUOTE=ginobli2311]yea.

i'm actually a bigger fan of kg. i love kg. i just think duncan was ever so slightly better. its why i have kg so high all time....he simply was too close to duncan in terms of level of play and impact to be ranked more than 5 to 7 spots behind him on any list.

kg was amazing and still is. its a real shame we never to see elite kg play with elite talent. he could have torn up the the league for an 8 year stretch in the right situation.[/QUOTE]

I agree with you overall. I think KG gets dogged a lot because he was in a hole that he didn't create. Overall, I think a great organization got nearly all the greatness they could in TD while a bad organization had a great player who put forth a great effort in KG. In the end they were remarkably similiar in effect and play but TD got more out of it. Plus TD has this incredible intangible that kept winning in close quarters despite not having the talent. KG has great intangibles as well but without structure it couldn't be transformed into wins.

TD has done the most with the least of any player, if you ask me.

[QUOTE=jlauber]As much as most all of us probably enjoy ranking the all-time greats, I have personally decided (maybe a New Year's resolution) to discontinue that philosophy. There have just been so many great players in the history of the NBA.

For instance, many here believe that Hakeem owned Robinson, based on their playoff battle in mid-90's. However, they faced each other 42 times in the regular season, and IMHO, the numbers show almost a complete draw...

[url]http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/h2h_finder.cgi?request=1&p1=robinda01&p2=olajuha01[/url]

And, to be honest, I think that if most of the great players, and in their primes, played against each other, there would probably be very little difference. Some were better offensive players, to be sure, while others were better defenders. Some were more efficient than others, while some had better range. Some were better rebounders, and some were better passers. And some, like Russell and Duncan, probably elevated the play their teammates better than others. But, overall, these top tier players would all be great. And given the right surrounding personnel (and here again, it would probably be a different criteria for each), they would probably all be winners and champions.

So, for me at least, I am just going to provide a little history in my major posts, but I will try to refrain from disparaging any other great players in the process.[/QUOTE]

Funny thing is when I looked at the Robinson/Hakeem numbers they look remarkably similiar to TD/KG H2Hs. Funny how things level off or how greats equal greats in comparisons in basketball. I think there isn't a lot of differential in the top 7 greatest (Duncan is in this party), where situations might be the only difference??? Then the next 8, where I have Hakeem, Robinson and KG in that group who suffer because of accomplishments and situations (Management, coaches, franchise, ability to get the most out of a super talent, etc.) But its hard to be hardcore about rank and order in basketball. It seems more defnitive in other sports and where wins doesn't factor in as much in conversations.

KG on the Spurs would almost certainly win a title in 05 and 07. Duncan didnt play all too well these years especially in the Finals and the 05 FMVP should have gone to Manu imo. 99, KG was too young so I don't think he could lead them all the way and 2003 Duncan put in a performance very few could replicate so I have my doubts. Thus I say KG would bring them 2 titles.

these threads sucks bro

[QUOTE=T-bomb 25]KG is great but Duncan is noticably better.....its really not very close,even as great as KG is.[/QUOTE]
This.Its not close.Ginobli bring up some excellent points

[QUOTE]1. duncan was a better low post player
2. duncan was a better rim protector and defensive anchor in paint
3. duncan was a better man to man defender on the low block
4. duncan's playoff and regular season numbers are slightly better
5. overall the advanced stats slightly favor duncan
6. duncan was more efficient in the playoffs
[/QUOTE]

Duncan needed to play out of his mind to help the Spurs compete until both Parker and Manu matured in the second half of the decade.In short,the Spurs roster lacked firepower and a young big man next to Duncan.

[CODE][B]2002

Western Conference Semifinals / Lakers 4-1 over Spurs

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

[B]2006

Western Conference Finals / Mavs 4-3 over Spurs

Duncan averaged 32.2 pts,11.7 rb,3.7 as,2.6 blk
[/B][/CODE]

Duncan won four rings because he usually had an extra gear.He was able to completely dominate on the biggest stage,against all the big teams.

[B]Lakers[/B]

[CODE]1999 Western Conference Semifinals / Spurs 4-0 over Lakers

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

Game 3 Duncan put 37/14/4/1

[B]Game 4 Duncan put 33/14/4/1[/B]


2002 Western Conference Semifinals / Lakers 4-1 over Spurs

Duncan averaged 29 pts,17.2 rb,4.6 as,3.2 blk

Game 4 Duncan put 30/11/6/4

[B]Game 5 Duncan put 34/25/4/2[/B]


2003 Western Conference Semifinals / Spurs 4-2 over Lakers

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

Game 4 36/9/5

Game 5 27/14/5/1

[B]Game 6 37/16/4/2[/B]
[/CODE]


[B]Mavs[/B]

[CODE]2001 Western Conference Semifinals / Spurs 4-1 Over Mavs

Duncan averaged 26.8 pts,17.4 rb,3.6 as,2 blk


Game 1 31/13/1/2

Game 2 25/22/6/1

Game 4 29/18/5/0

[B]Game 5 32/20/3/5[/B]


2003 Western Conference Finals/ Spurs 4-2 Over Mavs

Duncan averaged 28 pts,16.7 rb,5.8 as,3 blk

Game 1 40/15/7/1

Game 2 32/15/5/3

Game 3 34/24/6/6

Game 4 21/20/7/4

2006 Western Conference Semifinals / Mavs 4-3 Over Spurs

Duncan averaged 32.2 pts,11.7 rb,3.7 as,2.6 blk

Game 1 31/13/4/2

Game 3 35/12/2/2

Game 4 31/13/6/3

Game 5 36/12/4/3

[B]Game 7 41/15/6/3[/B][/CODE]

[B]Suns[/B]

[CODE]

2005 Western Conference Finals / Spurs 4-1 over Suns

Duncan averaged 27.4 pts,13.8 rb,3.2 as,1.8 blk

Game 1 28/15/4/1

Game 2 30/8/2/0

Game 3 33/15/3/3

[B]Game 5 31/15/4/3[/B]


2007 Western Conference Semifinals / Spurs 4-2 over Suns

Duncan averaged 26.8 pts,13.7 rb,1.1 as,4.1 blk

Game 1 33/16/1/3

Game 2 29/11/2

Game 3 33/19/3

[B]Game 6 24/13/1/9[/B]


2008 Western Conference First Round / Spurs 4-1 over Suns

Duncan averaged 24.8 pts,13.8 rb,2.6 as,2.4 blk

Game 1 40/15/5/3

[B]Game 5 29/17/3[/B]
[/CODE]

[QUOTE=drza44] I think he at least matches the 4 that Duncan's Spurs accomplished.[/QUOTE]
Spurs win zero championship because:

1) Tim Duncan Playoff version was in another level.

2) It's easier to build around a dominant post player

[QUOTE=Pointguard]Duncan numbers wouldn't skyrocket on a worse team. .[/QUOTE]

:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

Seriously,people need to stop using ad hoc arguments.

BTW,Dirk vs KG is a much better comparison.Dirk has been better since 2006 and destroyed KG in 2002.