I see Duncan is still 5hiting on Garnett

[SwagKingKong]

Games were one thing, but Shaq was the only player in the top 5 in MVP voting that had another player on his team consistently top 5. But you say off the wall shyt all the time so I don't blame you for not knowing that.



No it's not the only year. Kobe at his peak was CLEARLY better than KG, you are talking to the biggest KG fan on this site outside of Tremont and you're talking nonsense. The opinion you hold is something out of the twilight zone.

2001-02: Shaq and Kobe both top 5.
2002-03: Shaq and Kobe both top 5
03-04: Kobe 5 and Shaq 6.


They had a dynamic no one else had with two top 3-5 players both being on the same team. That's not even to say that I disagree with the MVP winners of those years, I think the NBA got it right. But tt's why some people thought LeBron wouldn't win anymore MVPs because they assumed both he and Wade would be great, but that hasn't been the case. There's a been a definitive back seat.

Kobe slacked off on defense because his team required it. KG was incapable of picking up the offensive load in the playoffs when his team required it. As far as defense goes, a defensive post presence will more often than not be more important than a guy on the wing. But Kobe was a great two way player from 2000-2004.

Listen, I've already read through and had multiple discussions about peak performances and I can say that you're talking out your ass if you believe that people with basketball knowledge would rate Kobes peak higher than Garnetts.

RealGM • View topic - RealGM 50 Highest Peaks Project Thread

This is an ongoing project in which they try to establish what the top 50 peaks of all-time in the NBA. as you can see, Garnett is at the 11th spot, while Kobe is at the 15. Read through the threads and see the discussions about their peak play. It's hundreds of posts going through their peak play and it becomes clear as day that Kobe wasn't really close to Garnett peak-wise. This is people who KNOWS basketball and goes through the list of arguments for and against eachother. Don't act like my opinion doesn't hold weight when it's yours that's completly ridiculous when you're talking to people who understands basketball.

 

[Brandsdale]

Timmy D still the best PF in the league

Those post moves in the paint

 

[FreshABM]

20-15-4

Great thread





Garnett bytch ass turned into a whore for that ring..when he was in minny he was all about loyalty...he won't talk to ray ray off the same principle..son turned leaving minny into some mini dwight shyt..what players has he made better like that dude timmy??? reggie miller bytchass hold more weight than garnett that dude was in dry ass indiana and never left ..now that's a

 

[Malta]

You rave about Spurs defense and ignoring the fact that he ALWAYS played within a great defensive system, with a great defensive coach and great defensive players. If you don't believe how much a great defensive scheme can help a team defense, when you have an anchor, you can start wondering how the hell Boston had the best defense in the NBA last year? Rondo, Ray Allen, Pierce, Bass playing heavy minutes.. It's because they have an anchor in Garnett and a defensive scheme that allows them to execute that defense. Does anyone seriously believe that Flip Saunders would make those Minny teams great defensive? Dude is like one of the worst defensive coaches and played a zone with Garnett at the top. Not to mention their roster was awful defensively and shouldn've been dead last defensively. Cassell, Sprewell, Hassell and Olowokandi has no business being top 6 defensively in the league, come on..

The Spurs won a title and had the best defense in the league with Rasho Nesterovic next to Duncan, everything you said goes out the window there. Also, the only constant with the Spurs defense has been Duncan, once he got old their defense fell out of the top 10, that says enough about his impact.

Sure, Garnetts offense was more assisted. I don't deny that Duncan was better at creating for himself in the post but that's not the single thing that makes a great offensive players.

Here are some more food for thought;

In 2002-2003, Garnetts AST% was 25.8, compared to Duncans 19.5 % (his highest ever)
In 2003-2004, Garnetts AST% was 24.4, compared to Duncans 17.4 %.

As you see, Garnett was MUCH better at creating for others in his offense and he did this all while turning the ball over less. That's a HUGE difference.

What you're describing at the end of your post is just another bullshyt made up view of Garnett. He was putting as much pressure on defenses as Duncan at his peak. He wasn't as good as him scoring the ball but the way he initiated their offense from the top of the key and got people in position to score was an aspect of the game that shytted on Duncans ability.

Here's more food for thought, Chris Webber, another face-up PF in love with jumpers also posted AST% ratios in line with KG, his highest was 24.9 and he had several years over 20%. Guess whose AST% ratio falls almost exactly in line with Duncans best? Shaq, who posted a best of 19.3%. No, he was not putting as much pressure on defenses as Duncan, while Tim didn't directly get assists you better believe his team had better ball movement on the perimeter when he kicked out of double teams and the ball was swung.

Duncan and Shaq vs Webber and KG, that is basically the breakdown on the numbers you're trying to use.

 

[Stuntone]

Kobe + Duncan = KG /thread.

 

[VBM]

Duncan's 03 run almost game/set/matches this thread. Look at that roster. Probably one of the worst teams to win a title. It was Duncan with a 2nd-year PG Parker who was getting benched for Speedy @#$%@ Claxton in money time in the Finals, rookie Manu Ginobili, 3rd-year Stephen Jackson, old-ass Robinson/Kevin Willis/Steve Smith/Steve Kerr/Danny Ferry. They did have Bowen da gawd...I'll give him that, but I'm still shocked to this day how the 03 version of the Spurs went through LA when the prior two seasons they couldn't.

Point is, the 03 squad had names on em, but that supporting cast on paper looks a lot better than it actually was. Duncan was THE threat on the team and the focal point for opposing defenses, and he still put together one of the greatest finals performances ever (near quad-double in a closeout game) and rang.

 

[VBM]

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JT213A0L1G0"]KG vs. Duncan[/ame]

 

[SwagKingKong]

The Spurs won a title and had the best defense in the league with Rasho Nesterovic next to Duncan, everything you said goes out the window there. Also, the only constant with the Spurs defense has been Duncan, once he got old their defense fell out of the top 10, that says enough about his impact.




Here's more food for thought, Chris Webber, another face-up PF in love with jumpers also posted AST% ratios in line with KG, his highest was 24.9 and he had several years over 20%. Guess whose AST% ratio falls almost exactly in line with Duncans best? Shaq, who posted a best of 19.3%. No, he was not putting as much pressure on defenses as Duncan, while Tim didn't directly get assists you better believe his team had better ball movement on the perimeter when he kicked out of double teams and the ball was swung.

Duncan and Shaq vs Webber and KG, that is basically the breakdown on the numbers you're trying to use.

Yes, Spurs defense was and still is great, they just play differently now and at a much faster pace. How does everything I say goes out the window because of that fact? Garnett lead an historically great defense, perhaps the best of all-time, in 2008 to a title. Does this mean that he suddenly became a defensive juggernaut at the age of 32? Or does it mean that he finally got the personell needed to anchor a top defense? Because ever since he came to Boston he's been anchoring a top 3 defense, even at this age. And with him, Pierce and Rondo as the only constants, who gets the credit here? What he's done in Boston pretty much strengthens the theory that Garnett dragged awful defenses into avarage in Minny, because they were avarage for the most of the time. Unless you think he somehow magically got better defensively out of his prime, which is ridiculous to believe.

As for your second point, what? Do you even know what you're saying? You quoting Webber number only proves my point. He's a top 3 passing big men of all-time, so naturally he's going to have numbers close to Garnetts. I don't get it, I quoted their AST % to show you how much better Garnett is at setting up his teammates and you argue against it by saying Webbers numbers are close to KGs, while Shaqs are closer to Duncans? I don't even get it... Do you believe that lower AST % shows that you're a better player or something? It's just a stat that tells you how many percentages of a teams possessions that were assisted by the person, and Garnett assisted his teammates at a much higher percentage that Duncan, Shaq or any other big men.. with a lower turnover rate.

This is one aspect offensively that Garnett clearly outplays Duncan, or even Shaq for that matter. I don't understand how you're even trying to argue against it? You talked about Duncans superior scoring in the post, and I showed that Garnett did other things from the post..

 

[SuikodenII]

Duncan's 03 run almost game/set/matches this thread. Look at that roster. Probably one of the worst teams to win a title. It was Duncan with a 2nd-year PG Parker who was getting benched for Speedy @#$%@ Claxton in money time in the Finals, rookie Manu Ginobili, 3rd-year Stephen Jackson, old-ass Robinson/Kevin Willis/Steve Smith/Steve Kerr/Danny Ferry. They did have Bowen da gawd...I'll give him that, but I'm still shocked to this day how the 03 version of the Spurs went through LA when the prior two seasons they couldn't.

Point is, the 03 squad had names on em, but that supporting cast on paper looks a lot better than it actually was. Duncan was THE threat on the team and the focal point for opposing defenses, and he still put together one of the greatest finals performances ever (near quad-double in a closeout game) and rang.

The winner of the Kings/Mavs match up in the playoffs was gonna win the ring that year...I almost put $100 on it

I got the nets right but...who didn't

 

[Malta]

Yes, Spurs defense was and still is great, they just play differently now and at a much faster pace. How does everything I say goes out the window because of that fact? Garnett lead an historically great defense, perhaps the best of all-time, in 2008 to a title. Does this mean that he suddenly became a defensive juggernaut at the age of 32? Or does it mean that he finally got the personell needed to anchor a top defense? Because ever since he came to Boston he's been anchoring a top 3 defense, even at this age. And with him, Pierce and Rondo as the only constants, who gets the credit here? What he's done in Boston pretty much strengthens the theory that Garnett dragged awful defenses into avarage in Minny, because they were avarage for the most of the time. Unless you think he somehow magically got better defensively out of his prime, which is ridiculous to believe.

The Spurs defense is no longer great, they fell off with Duncans age with him not being able to move around like he used to. See, there you go with the corny hyperbole historically great defense and greatest of all time, word? The Spurs team in 04-05 had a better defensive rating than the 07-08 Celtics, and the 03-04 Spurs had a defensive rating of 94.1 to the Cs 98.9 Duncan has been apart of more top 10 ranked defensive teams than KG, you can attribute that to coaching and roster all you want, but they have had a gang of different starting lineups since he's been there. Also, since your brought up coaching, what about Tom Thibodeau? Didn't he have something to do with the C's defense.

As for your second point, what? Do you even know what you're saying? You quoting Webber number only proves my point. He's a top 3 passing big men of all-time, so naturally he's going to have numbers close to Garnetts. I don't get it, I quoted their AST % to show you how much better Garnett is at setting up his teammates and you argue against it by saying Webbers numbers are close to KGs, while Shaqs are closer to Duncans? I don't even get it... Do you believe that lower AST % shows that you're a better player or something? It's just a stat that tells you how many percentages of a teams possessions that were assisted by the person, and Garnett assisted his teammates at a much higher percentage that Duncan, Shaq or any other big men.. with a lower turnover rate.

This is one aspect offensively that Garnett clearly outplays Duncan, or even Shaq for that matter. I don't understand how you're even trying to argue against it? You talked about Duncans superior scoring in the post, and I showed that Garnett did other things from the post..

You don't get why I brought up Webber, really? I'm linking him and Garnett because it shows that face-up bigs will almost always get more assists than traditional back to the basket bigs. The impact Garnett & Webber had on a defense standing 20 feet away from the rim and hitting cutters is not the same as Shaq or Duncan with their back to the rim, pounding the ball, getting a double, kicking the ball out and it being swung around the perimeter. The point is that using assists for big men as a baraometer is silly, the classic back to the basket big man does not rack up a ton of assists. And the classic back to the basket big man will always be better and more impactful than the jumpshooting big that plays from the top of the key. You're trying to imply that because he got assists that his impact on a defense was the same, which isn't even remotely true.

We can even bring Hakeem into the equation, his career best AST% ratio was 18.3. So we have the 3 best post players of the last 30 years, all with essentially the same AST% ratios, anyone with eyes can see KG/Webber never had the impact those 3 guys had on a defense.

 

[GreatestLaker]

Duncan's 03 run almost game/set/matches this thread. Look at that roster. Probably one of the worst teams to win a title. It was Duncan with a 2nd-year PG Parker who was getting benched for Speedy @#$%@ Claxton in money time in the Finals, rookie Manu Ginobili, 3rd-year Stephen Jackson, old-ass Robinson/Kevin Willis/Steve Smith/Steve Kerr/Danny Ferry. They did have Bowen da gawd...I'll give him that, but I'm still shocked to this day how the 03 version of the Spurs went through LA when the prior two seasons they couldn't.

Point is, the 03 squad had names on em, but that supporting cast on paper looks a lot better than it actually was. Duncan was THE threat on the team and the focal point for opposing defenses, and he still put together one of the greatest finals performances ever (near quad-double in a closeout game) and rang.

lol @ the bullshyt in this post.

That Lakers team sucked. One of the worst Laker teams in the past 12 years. They were on their last legs after winning three straight championships.

3 of the contenders in the West were hit with injuries. Lakers - Kobe and Shaq. Kings - Webber suffered an injury to his knee that ended his career as an elite player. Dirk went out with an ankle sprain.

Duncan's path to the finals that year was fukking easy.

 

[SwagKingKong]

The Spurs defense is no longer great, they fell off with Duncans age with him not being able to move around like he used to. See, there you go with the corny hyperbole historically great and greatest of all time, word? The Spurs team in 04-05 had a better defensive rating than the 07-08 Celtics Duncan has been apart of more top 10 ranked defensive teams than KG, you can attribute that to coaching and roster all you want, but they have had a gang of different starting lineups since he's been there. Also, since your brought up coaching, what about Tom Thibodeau? Didn't he have something to do with the C's defense.





You don't get why I brought up Webber, really? I'm linking him and Garnett because it shows that face-up bigs will almost always get more assists than traditional back to the basket bigs. The impact Garnett & Webber had on a defense standing 20 feet away from the rim and hitting cutters is not the same as Shaq or Duncan with their back to the rim, pounding the ball, getting a double, kicking the ball out and it being swung around the perimeter. The point is that using assists for big men as a baraometer is silly, the classic back to the basket big man does not rack up a ton of assists. And the classic back to the basket big man will always be better and more impactful than the jumpshooting big that plays from the top of the key. You're trying to imply that because he got assists that his impact on a defense was the same, which isn't even remotely true.

We can even bring Hakeem into the equation, his career best AST% ratio was 18.3. So we have the 3 best post players of the last 30 years, all with essentially the same AST% ratios, anyone with eyes can see KG/Webber never had the impact those 3 guys had on a defense.

Spurs defense didn't really fall off, they play differently. How can you not get this? Spurs have been around the ~10th spot defensively for the last couple of years, while playing at a much faster pace than they've done historically. They were around 28th in pace for a couple of years prior to the changes made by Popvich, all of a sudden they're top 7 and top 10 in pace for the last two years. It's not a coincidence. You think Popovich forgot how to make his team play D? Sure, they wouldn't be as good as they were when they peaked but they're still good. And don't worry about hyperboles made by me, you still get my point. English isn't my first langauge so I don't value words like great like y'all do..

Why I don't get the Webber comparasion is because it says literally NOTHING else than that they both are great at creating buckets for teammates. The comparasion doesn't make sense because you can't just find two players who does ONE thing close to eachother, and act like their game is identical. Shaq never played like Duncan neither. Webber didn't play like Garnett neither. He's less efficient (51 TS% compared to Garnetts 55 TS%) and doesn't really do anything as well as Garnett. You're lumping together Duncan with two players who are greater than him and saying "look, their AST % are alike and therefore it shows that they play the same way" and then continue to compare Garnett with a lesser player and say "because these two people AST % total are alike, they play the same way". If you've ever seen Webber and Garnett play you'd know that their playing style doesn't really remind of eachothers.

There's no factual evidence that a traditional big man is per definition more valuable than a face up big. Sure, there's been more great traditional back to the basket big men but it's understandable considering Garnett is one of the pioneers of the face up big men and he's still playing today. This doesn't mean that a face up big CAN'T be better or just as good as a traditional big man though.

Basically what I'm trying to say is, you're basing your argument on that Duncan was a better scorer at his peak. Which he was. Their raw scoring numbers were about the same while Duncan did it more efficiently. What I'm saying is, there are other aspects of the game in which Garnett peaked higher than Duncan though. I don't know how you can argue against that. It's clear Garnett was the better passer, and even rebounder, although slightly, at his peak.

 

[VBM]

lol @ the bullshyt in this post.

That Lakers team sucked. One of the worst Laker teams in the past 12 years. They were on their last legs after winning three straight championships.

3 of the contenders in the West were hit with injuries. Lakers - Kobe and Shaq. Kings - Webber suffered an injury to his knee that ended his career as an elite player. Dirk went out with an ankle sprain.

Duncan's path to the finals that year was fukking easy.

Duncan & Co. could give a fukk about injuries when Duncan's knee injury in 2000 started the Laker 3-peat (and the Derek Anderson injury a year later helped keep it going). Part of the game. Plus, they still beat a healthy Nets squad for the ring.

 

[GreatestLaker]

Duncan & Co. could give a fukk about injuries when Duncan's knee injury in 2000 started the Laker 3-peat (and the Derek Anderson injury a year later helped keep it going). Part of the game. Plus, they still beat a healthy Nets squad for the ring.

The Nets bruh?

Derek Anderson? Like he would have prevented the sweep?

Just don't bring up that run to show how great Duncan was when all the contenders in the West went out with injuries. The Spurs had it easy that year.

 

[Dusty Bake Activate]

That Lakers team sucked. One of the worst Laker teams in the past 12 years. They were on their last legs after winning three straight championships.

Think about what you just typed for a second.