Replace KG with Duncan on the Spurs

drza44

again you confuse things.

for example. me saying that duncan was better on the low block does not mean i'm saying that duncan was a better overall offensive player.

me saying that duncan was a better post defender and rim protector does not mean i'm saying duncan was a better overall defensive player.

look. we both agree that the players are very very close to each other in terms of level of play and impact.

so again. would i rather have the versatile guy that doesn't dominate the low block on offense, but can space the floor and play multiple positions?

for me...i'd rather have the low post guy.,

would i rather have the more versatile defender that can guard more positions or the guy that can guard the post and protect the paint better?

for me....i'd rather have the low post defender and rim protector.

you've already conceded that duncan was superior at both of those things. and i've already conceded kg was superior in other areas on both ends.

so for the last time. i'd prefer to have the dominant low post presence on offense and the better paint protector on defense. that is the difference for me. i think that wins more in the playoffs. it has throughout nba history. we'll never know if kg's style could have reproduced what duncan did. its a shame that kg wasted so much of his career in minny.

once again everything you say with i pretty much agree with and i respect your opinion. i just disagree with it.

[QUOTE=ginobli2311]drza44

again you confuse things.

[B]for example. me saying that duncan was better on the low block does not mean i'm saying that duncan was a better overall offensive player.

me saying that duncan was a better post defender and rim protector does not mean i'm saying duncan was a better overall defensive player.[/B]

look. we both agree that the players are very very close to each other in terms of level of play and impact.

so again. would i rather have the versatile guy that doesn't dominate the low block on offense, but can space the floor and play multiple positions?

for me...i'd rather have the low post guy.,

would i rather have the more versatile defender that can guard more positions or the guy that can guard the post and protect the paint better?

for me....i'd rather have the low post defender and rim protector.

you've already conceded that duncan was superior at both of those things. and i've already conceded kg was superior in other areas on both ends.

so for the last time. i'd prefer to have the dominant low post presence on offense and the better paint protector on defense. that is the difference for me. i think that wins more in the playoffs. it has throughout nba history. we'll never know if kg's style could have reproduced what duncan did. its a shame that kg wasted so much of his career in minny.

once again everything you say with i pretty much agree with and i respect your opinion. i just disagree with it.[/QUOTE]

I'm not confused, I'm just forcing clarity into our statements. Take a look at the difference between what you wrote in your earlier statements that led to my disagreement and subsequent rebuttals:

[QUOTE=ginobli2311][B]duncan was a superior offensive player than kg.[/B] kg is more versatile, but duncan had a bigger impact and was far more dominant. kg was never really a dominant offensive player....at least not like duncan. duncan could control an entire game and series on the low block. he had to be doubled and really when you have to double a low post player you are screwed.

so anyone saying kg was on par with duncan offensively in terms if impact isn't on point.

...

[B]so, like always, you need to delve deeper into why duncan is better (which he is). and its because he was more dominant offensively and because he was a better paint protector defensively. [/B]duncan is a superior one on one defender on the low block and a better rim protector and a bit better at off the ball shot blocking as well.
[/quote]

Now, compare that to your statement above. See the difference? In the early statements you were saying point-blank that while it may be close, Duncan was definitely the better player, whereas now you are saying that they each have strengths and weaknesses, and that you simply prefer Duncan's style. That's a big difference, and what I've been trying to get at all along.

You once asked me in this thread what I would consider a reasonable stance for someone preferring Duncan over Garnett. That's it, what you just typed in your most recent statement. If you say "I can't really prove one way or the other which one is better, but I prefer Duncan's style" then ok, I can't really argue with a preference. That's an 'agree to disagree' place. But if you say "They're close, but Duncan is definitively better and thus that's why I prefer Duncan" then that's a different statement, and one I'd ask you to defend as I offer counter-evidence. You seem to have moved away from the latter, and have settled more into the former. If that's the case then yes, I'm (finally) willing to agree-to-disagree.

[QUOTE=drza44]The biggest reason for the 2003 - 2009 APM stats is that those are the only years where the stat is available. 82games.com didn't start keeping track of the +/- stats until 2002-03, and as far as I know that data isn't publicly available anywhere else from before that season.

But practically speaking, those are the main areas of question in this thread anyway. From my post that answers the OP (1st post on page 7 of this thread), I argue that KG would have kept the Spurs contending in '99 and made them contenders in 2000 (the year Duncan was hurt for the postseason). But that he wouldn't have made them contenders in '01 or '02 because Duncan was brilliant those years and still couldn't get the Spurs past the Lakers. So really, the most controversial years as far as this thread goes are the 2003 - 2009 seasons. Those are the years when Duncan led the Spurs to three titles, and those are the years I'm arguing that KG would have been able to accomplish the same or better. So to that end, it makes sense that these are the years that get covered most stringently in this thread (especially since, as I mentioned before, we have more available stats to make better informed analysis for those years).[/QUOTE]

drza44, I appreciate the time you took to explain your POV. However, I don't agree with some of your points. In particular, your using the reason of Garnett just not being in the playoffs as much as Duncan to explain why KG doesn't take over playoff games like TD (see post #90 which you never did address).

I still haven't read anything to convince me that KG could have carried a team such as the 03 Spurs to a championship. So far, only Hakeem has taken a similar type team to a ring.

I agree that on the 07 and 08 championship teams, they are probably both interchangeable. I'm not sure whether the battles against the Suns in 05, 07, 08 would have gone the same way with KG as TD was a big part of why they got by the Suns (they had to double team him & eventually tried Shaq to counter him).

I'll leave you with the thoughts of some one who played many years with the both of them (4 years with KG and 3 years with TD):

Reporters question:

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

Rasho:

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

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

[QUOTE=rmt]drza44, I appreciate the time you took to explain your POV. However, I don't agree with some of your points. In particular, your using the reason of Garnett just not being in the playoffs as much as Duncan to explain why KG doesn't take over playoff games like TD (see post #90 which you never did address). [/quote]

Fair enough, though I do think you misunderstood my point. I wasn't saying that KG doesn't take over playoff games like Duncan, I was saying that he in fact DID take over playoff games like Duncan but that many didn't notice/remember it because he wasn't in as many games. But KG absolutely has taken over his share of postseason games that match up well with Duncan at his best. Some examples:

[B]1999 and 2001[/B]: Garnett played Duncan to a stand still in both series.

[B]2002:[/B] Garnett goes for 19/21/6 in game 1; 31/18/4/3/2 in game 2; and 22/17/5 in game 3. Hard to blame him for the team's loss.

[B]2003:[/B] Garnett goes for 35, 20 and 7 to lead the Wolves to their first win in the series, then follows that up with a 33 point, 14 reb, 4 ast, 4 blk, 2 steal game to steal a second win on the road (including 8 points in the last 4 minutes of the 4th Q).

[B]2004: [/B]That whole playoff run was littered with takeover games. There was his 30/20 game to open the playoffs, his 20/22/10 triple-double, his 30/15/3/3/5 game 3 to lead the Wolves to a road win over the Kings (he scored 15 points in the 4th Q and OT). Then, of course there's the 32/21/2/5/4 effort to win the first game 7 of his career, in which he made all of his team's FGs in the 4th Q.

[B]2008: [/B]Again, there are take-over games throughout the postseason. I see Cavs game 1 where KG overcame Pierce and Allen combining to shoot 2-for-18 from the field with 10 turnovers to lead the Cs to a win...KG scored 28 in that game, including the game-tying jumper with 1 minute left and the game-winning drive with 20 seconds left. [I]"Presumably, LeBron will rebound. So will Pierce and Allen. The difference was that KG didn't have an off night when his team needed him more than any other time this season to be on. THAT is worthy of the label "MVP."[/I] [url]http://www.sportingnews.com/blog/the_sporting_blog/entry/view/8211/shanoffs_wake-up_call_kg_mvp-ish,_bron_not#ixzz0vkdwfz2l[/url]

Or the 33 point effort in game 5 against the Pistons, in which he hit the game-clinching free throws with 3 seconds left on the clock. [I] "Here's the big deal. When Garnett went to the foul line with 3.4 seconds left, the sellout crowd of 18,624 at TD Banknorth Garden, who squirmed in their seats when the Detroit Pistons pulled within 100-99 with 1:36 remaining, held their collective breath. The Celtics needed Garnett, who hit his previous six attempts from the line, to be Mr. Clutch after he induced Rasheed Wallace to commit his fifth personal. After he made the first free throw, Garnett wasted no time in hoisting up the second, leaving no doubt which 2 points ranked as the biggest of his 33-point effort in last night's intense 106-102 victory over the Pistons in Game 5 of the Eastern Conference finals." [/I][url]http://www.boston.com/sports/basketball/celtics/articles/2008/05/29/garnett_made_it_look_routine/[/url]


Or his huge game in the Championship closeout game against the Lakers, where he had 17 points/6 boards/3 assists at the half and only stopped at 26/14/4 because the Lakers gave up and the game turned into one of the biggest blowouts in NBA Finals history. [I]"Setting aside the dramatic comebacks that we

[QUOTE=drza44]I'm not confused, I'm just forcing clarity into our statements. Take a look at the difference between what you wrote in your earlier statements that led to my disagreement and subsequent rebuttals:



Now, compare that to your statement above. See the difference? In the early statements you were saying point-blank that while it may be close, Duncan was definitely the better player, whereas now you are saying that they each have strengths and weaknesses, and that you simply prefer Duncan's style. That's a big difference, and what I've been trying to get at all along.

You once asked me in this thread what I would consider a reasonable stance for someone preferring Duncan over Garnett. That's it, what you just typed in your most recent statement. If you say "I can't really prove one way or the other which one is better, but I prefer Duncan's style" then ok, I can't really argue with a preference. That's an 'agree to disagree' place. But if you say "They're close, but Duncan is definitively better and thus that's why I prefer Duncan" then that's a different statement, and one I'd ask you to defend as I offer counter-evidence. You seem to have moved away from the latter, and have settled more into the former. If that's the case then yes, I'm (finally) willing to agree-to-disagree.[/QUOTE]

ok. that is fine.

but i still think duncan was the superior offensive player because of his low post dominance.

and i still think duncan was the superior defender because of his paint protection.

i was just laying it out very simply for you in my last post. its not just style. there is more substance to duncan's style than kg's. that is how i feel. can i prove it? well....as well as you can prove something that is not factual. you keep posting stats and numbers. and almost always they are either the exact same or duncan is a little bit better overall.

factor that in with what we've seen duncan do (win consistently with a variety of different teams) and i keep coming back to duncan is slightly better than kg.

there is really no argument that kg is better. just opinion. but looking totally at the facts and what has happened.....there is an argument that duncan is slightly better. and that is the difference.

[QUOTE=ginobli2311]ok. that is fine.

but i still think duncan was the superior offensive player because of his low post dominance.

and i still think duncan was the superior defender because of his paint protection.

i was just laying it out very simply for you in my last post. its not just style. there is more substance to duncan's style than kg's. that is how i feel. can i prove it? well....as well as you can prove something that is not factual. you keep posting stats and numbers. and almost always they are either the exact same or duncan is a little bit better overall.

factor that in with what we've seen duncan do (win consistently with a variety of different teams) and i keep coming back to duncan is slightly better than kg.

there is really no argument that kg is better. just opinion. but looking totally at the facts and what has happened.....there is an argument that duncan is slightly better. and that is the difference.[/QUOTE]
How has duncan won consistently with different teams? He's always been on the spurs under the same coach running the same defensive schemes and playing the same slow paced style. For the past three championships past the lockout he has had parker, ginobli, and a bunch of defensive role players. Literally the same thing year in and year out.

KG is the one that has shown that he can make a huge impact on any team he's put on. He dragged terrible casts with the twolves to the WCF and to the playoffs every single year he was with them. And then he went to boston and turned that team into an all time great defensive team and perrenial powerhouse.

I'm sorry but that statement made no sense. Duncan has been a part of the same system for his entire span of dominance and it is KG who has demonstrated the ability to be effective in multiple different systems.

also.

you keep giving us examples of kg's greatness. why? is anyone here disputing that he is great? like i've said before....he's my 14th best player right now and that could change for the better depending on how kg finishes his career...etc.

i could go run down a ton of quotes about duncan or run down all of his killer playoff and finals performances.

we get it. you love kg and think he's better than duncan. thats cool. we just disagree. we don't need you to show us why kg was/is so amazing. we already know this.

you seem to keep having problems with what i say. you have a problem with me saying "duncan was a superior offensive player".... that is my opinion. you have two guys with virtually the same numbers offensively. duncan is slightly more efficient. and duncan was the better low post player. and that puts him over the top for me. its fine if you don't agree. but its more than a valid reason simply because throughout the history of the nba....dominant post players have won titles year in year out.

does this mean kg couldn't have or wouldn't have? of course not.

same thing can be said about the interior defense as well. two players that have a very similar impact, but one is the better interior defender. again....i think interior defense is more important so i'll take duncan.

its not just style. there is substance to that style. i have nba history on my side and i've seen duncan do it. you have the hypothetical of what kg could have done.

and if you really want to get down to it. just look at last year's nba finals. kg couldn't board in that series against bynum/gasol. just look at game 7. 3 rebounds in 38 minutes and his team desperately needed someone to board. you can come up with excuses all you want, but a stronger interior presence would not get hammered so badly on the boards. and once again this brings me back to duncan being the superior interior presence on both ends. kg grabbed over 6 boards in 1 game of the finals this year. and rebounding was of supreme importance.

[QUOTE=tpols]How has duncan won consistently with different teams? He's always been on the spurs under the same coach running the same defensive schemes and playing the same slow paced style. For the past three championships past the lockout he has had parker, ginobli, and a bunch of defensive role players. Literally the same thing year in and year out.

KG is the one that has shown that he can make a huge impact on any team he's put on. He dragged terrible casts with the twolves to the WCF and to the playoffs every single year he was with them. And then he went to boston and turned that team into an all time great defensive team and perrenial powerhouse.

I'm sorry but that statement made no sense. Duncan has been a part of the same system for almost all of his span of dominance and it is KG who has demonstrated the ability to be effective in multiple different systems.[/QUOTE]


he won with robinson and without him. we won with parker and manu and without them.

that is different teams. the spurs with robinson are far different than the spurs with manu/parker.

they are different teams made up of different players. it makes perfect sense.

and the current spurs are far different as well.

[QUOTE=ginobli2311]he won with robinson and without him. we won with parker and manu and without them.

that is different teams. the spurs with robinson are far different than the spurs with manu/parker.

they are different teams made up of different players. it makes perfect sense.[/QUOTE]
He won ONE championship with a still great defensively drob averaging 16/10 as a rookie after the lockout and then got bounced every year until 03. Then he won in the 2000s, while he was in his prime, on the exact same team year in and year out(gino+parker+bowen+defensive role players). His whole prime he played and won with the same team. And his whole career he played for the same team, the same coach, the same slow paced style, and the same schemes. KG has proven much more in this department than duncan.

The Spurs will probably be without the title of 1999 or 2003, but I can still see them winning in 2005 and 2007(assuming Mavs are upset as before). The current Spurs team operates well with or without Duncan, this is a team in which everyone comes to play.

[QUOTE=magnax1]Well, there is no way in hell that Duncan wins Minnesota a championship, but idk whether KG wins 4 or not. I'd say that most likely he does.[/QUOTE]
LMFAO what total shit. He would have at least won one. KG isn't fit to hold Tim's Jock. Tim totally owned his ass when he was in Minny. What an asinine thing to say.

[QUOTE=ginobli2311]also.

you keep giving us examples of kg's greatness. why? is anyone here disputing that he is great? like i've said before....he's my 14th best player right now and that could change for the better depending on how kg finishes his career...etc.

i could go run down a ton of quotes about duncan or run down all of his killer playoff and finals performances.

we get it. you love kg and think he's better than duncan. thats cool. we just disagree. we don't need you to show us why kg was/is so amazing. we already know this. [/quote]

I was responding specifically to rmt, who in post #90 gave some specific examples of Duncan's big postseason performances, then in post #124 called me out for not responding to his previous post about KG not having big postseason performances. Since he asked me twice for that info, I would say it was perfectly reasonable for me to answer as I did. Also, in his post #124, he gave a quote from a player suggesting that KG wasn't a leader on those Celtics...wouldn't the logical thing for me to do, then, be to give him quotes from others that were closer to the situation that supported my statement? Your protest here doesn't make much sense.

[QUOTE=ginobli2311]you seem to keep having problems with what i say. you have a problem with me saying "duncan was a superior offensive player".... that is my opinion. you have two guys with virtually the same numbers offensively. duncan is slightly more efficient. and duncan was the better low post player. and that puts him over the top for me. its fine if you don't agree. but its more than a valid reason simply because throughout the history of the nba....dominant post players have won titles year in year out. [/quote]

I don't have a problem with you saying "Duncan was a superior offensive player", but if you say it then I'm going to ask you to support that with facts and not just supposition. In return, I will post my own analysis. That's the nature of a discussion. But what has happened repeatedly in this thread is, you make a declarative statement in Duncan's favor, I counter with an opinion in KG's favor with lots of objective stats or even anecdotes to support my opinion, then you respond testily (either you call me confused or some other negative comment) and proceed to ignore my analysis. That doesn't lend to a very positive exchange.

Examples (from this thread):

[B]1) You: "duncan commanded a double. kg did not. "[/B] - post 63 of the thread

Me (responding directly to this quote): "This isn't true. I mean, like at all. Garnett was fiercely double-teamed when he was in Minnesota..." with detailed analysis of 4 different offensive sets that Minnesota ran often, where the double would come from, and how KG would counter it - post #79

You: "what i don't agree with is that kg demanded a double as much as duncan. in all of the games i watched of both players in the playoffs....i saw duncan hard doubled far more often." - post 82, and "also. i don't need a history lesson. - post 83

(No response to my analysis outside of a snarky-sounding comment that you don't need a history lesson, and then a re-statement of your opinion).

[B]2) You: "i could talk about kg's inept play in tight games at times" [/B]- post 83

Me (responding directly to this quote): "This is very commonly said. The thing is, I haven't seen the proof... Here's what I found:" followed by a detailed list of each player's clutch stats every year since 2002-03 that shows KG's and Duncan's performance in crunch time to be practically identical. - post 86

You: "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. " - post 92

(Again, a bit of snark, followed by dismissing my tangible support as a tangent, then you re-stating your opinion that runs counter to my analysis without any further support).

[B]3) You "duncan was a superior offensive player than kg[/B]. ... so anyone saying kg was on par with duncan offensively in terms if impact isn't on point." - post 34 and "duncan was a better low post player" post 92.

Me: "Our point of contention isn't whether or not Duncan is the better post player, but whether Garnett's other strengths are sufficient to bridge or even go beyond Duncan's. I believe yes, you believe no. But that Duncan is better on the blocks isn't something I'm contending against." post 114

You: "again you confuse things. for example. me saying that duncan was better on the low block does not mean i'm saying that duncan was a better overall offensive player"


See, at this point I do start to get confused. If every time I engage you on a subject, addressing something you said directly, you deflect and then recant what you said, only to ignore my support and re-state your previously held view...how am I supposed to debate with that? What would be the point? At this point I guess you're right, you've stated where you stand, I've offered a counter-opinion with what I believe to be reasonable support, and you disagree. I guess there's no particular reason for us to continue to address each other unless something new is brought to the table.

KG isn't on the Spurs, Duncan is.

Drza,

ginobli often does this in debates. I've never seen him budge from whatever agenda/opinion he comes in with. You could show him stats, proof, whatever, and he'll always nitpick at something, think he has 'beat' you in the debate, and then throw in a little insult. It's really not worth it to debate with him but if you want to continue dismissing his opinions that's fine with me:cheers:

Personally, I think KG is every bit as good a basketball player as duncan and the only reason duncan is thought more highly of is because he won more(while being on vastly superior teams).

drza44,

The reason I posted Rasho's comments was that he [B]played with [U]both[/U] KG and TD for many years[/B]. I could pull out tons of quotes on how good both KG and TD are as leaders but not any from another player who actually played with them both.

To me, Rasho's comments were about the intangibles and KG not being "[B][U]mentally strong enough to be a team leader[/U][/B]" and "[B][U]a true team leader that scores in clutch moments[/U][/B]" as the difference between KG and TD - not stats.

And I'm female - not male.