Thread Tools

Display Modes

Kmasonbx · 06-17-2003, 05:57 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by newmessiah10!

But the reason why the Spurs got Duncan was because they lost Robinson for the year, the year before. Robinson's downside began that year and he really hasn't been an All-Star player since. Remember when he was dominating he was getting 25 and 12 a game. He couldn't do that after that debalitating bad injury.

If the Celtics had got Duncan instead, we would be talking about the Celtics being in the Finals multiple times and Rick Pitino would still be the coach and the Spurs would have no championships at all.

Duncan's first year Robinson was still a 20 and 10 player, I think he got something like 21 and 12, he was actually the team's leading rebounder if I'm not mistaken (I don't feel like looking it up). Your comment about the Celtics is a given, Duncan is a great player, I feel he is the best player in the league, but he is not head and shoulders above Garnett. If Duncan is a 10, Garnett is a solid 9.8, there isn't much of a gap. I think once Garnett leaves Minnesota he will get the praise he deserves.

pizzoni · 06-17-2003, 06:12 PM

Duncan is better, It is simple.

The support cast is equal, but the T´Wolves got Wally who can really shoot the ball and walk. If the Spurs had a great shooter who could play (Kerr and Smith couldn´t do this year), they would have sweep everyone not named Lakers in the Playoffs.

Ducan is way better at the post, and the game were always about post players (Shaq, Wilt, Bill), only Jordan won in this league without a great post players (although Rodman and Cartwright might desagree).

And Duncan can check Garnett but Garnett can´t check Duncan it is simple as that.

When the Lakers got they 3 championships, was always Bryant who beat the Spurs, not Shaq. When they got a good perimiter defender (Bowen), they beat the crap out of LA (Although I don´t think that they would do it in 2000 or 2001).

Quote:

Originally posted by q!
As I said in my post, name a player who could take KG's place and made it into the playoffs all 7 of those years. There isn't one.

Duncan, Shaq (Would have made through the finals), Bryant, T-Mac, Pierce (Would won at least one series in the last 7 years), Iverson, Malone, maybe Payton, Kidd, Marbury...

And Garnett make twice as much than Duncan (If Duncan care more about money than winning, he would have sign with Orlando).

Pizzoni

Ps. If Brandon were health the T´Wolves would have won a serie in this year or last year (If he were health they would have a better record).

My english is a little rusty, so ignore the mistakes.

**Crossword** · 06-17-2003, 06:14 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Kmasonbx!

You misunderstood what he was saying, Duncan and Robinson have played together for 6 years, 6 years ago Robinson was a great player. Robinson taught Duncan how to be a leader.

Duncan's supporting cast is much better than Garnett's. There is really no comparison. Garnett is everything to his team, like q brought up before his team is 25 points with him on the court, the next closest is 15 and thats Duncan. Personally I feel Duncan has a slight edge over Garnett, but to say Garnett is not on Duncan's level is just ridiculous.

I said Garnett is not on Duncan's level, but I didn't mean it that way. There is still a gap between them. I said KG is amazing and he is. In my opinion he's the 2nd best player in the game. But there is still a gap between Duncan and Garnett, even though it's not very big. There's still a gap, and that's why until there is NO gap, he's not on Duncan's level.

Anyway, Duncan's supporting cast is not MUCH better than KG's. It is better, but not by that much. Starting point guard (Parker vs. Hudson) is pretty even, starting shooting guard (Peeler vs. Jackson) is pretty even - they're both really streaky shooters - but the edge goes to Jackson, starting small forward (Bowen vs. Szczerbiak) goes to Minnesota, starting center (Robinson vs. Nesterovic) is pretty even, but Rasho is younger so he gets the nod. So it comes down to the benches. San Antonio has Ginobili, Rose, and Claxton, Smith, Willis, and Kerr. Minnesota has Gill, Jackson, Smith, Trent, Strickland. San Antonio wins that one, and even then it's not by a landslide either. Smith, Willis and Kerr didn't play more than 12 minutes a game this season, if you want to bring up the minutes issue.

Duncan has a better supporting cast, but not by much.

Kmasonbx · 06-17-2003, 06:38 PM

The starting 5 for the Spurs isn't much better than the T Wolves, but I don't think there is any comparison when talking about the benches. Ginobili, Rose and Claxton proved their worth throughout. The only player on Minnesota's bench that is really worth mentioning is Rod Strickland, ( I forgot he was the backup). So it's clear the Spurs bench is much better, don't try and downplay Duncan's supporting cast, they have the best group of role players in the league. Althought Kerr didn't play much he came up huge in 3 of the spurs most important games this year, game 6 against Dallas and games 5 and 6 against the Nets. The T Wolves have nobody that would have been able to do that.

Pizzoni,

There is no way the team's supporting casts are equal for the reason I've stated above. And there are maybe only 2 players would have enjoyed the same type of success with Garnett's supporting cast and thats Duncan and maybe Shaq at 100%, not the Shaq that we saw this year.

socco · 06-17-2003, 08:17 PM

Robinson is better than Rasho. Maybe not a better player really, about the same, but better to the team. Robinson's age is actually what gives him the edge over Rasho, not the other way around. The Wolves don't have a leader on the team other than KG. The Spurs have many. That matters just as much as talent does, if not more. I know Wally was an all-star, KG made him one but that doesn't even matter, but Bowen is better. The can both only shoot on offense. I don't care if Bowen gets open shots, cus he makes them, and that's all that counts. When comparing two guys here, we should discuss what they do, even if conditions help them, they score the points, and that's all that counts. Wally gives up alot of good opportunities cus he tries to drive and dribble. Bowen doesn't do that because he can't, but Wally does do it even though he can't. And then there's the defense part. It's is not even close. Even if Wally had an edge on offense, which would be very slight if any, then the defense makes up for it and then some, actualy and then alot. Did you guys see the first 2 games in particular against the Lakers by Bowen? He basically shut down Kobe. I know you can't shut down Kobe, but compared to what Kobe usually does nad how hard he has to work for it, Bowen completely shut him down. And this is Kobe Bryant, one of the top players in the league. I can recall in a regular seaosn game between the Wolves and Lakers, Kobe was about 5-10 feet away from Wally, kinda jogging it down, and did a little cross over and Wally falls on his @$$. Wally is actually the worst defender i've seen. The Spurs have the best defensive team(numbers don't say so, but they do). The Spurs also have 3 of the top 10 3-point shooters and none of them even play. That says something about how good their team when that many good guys don't play. Ya they're old, but they all played quite a bit in the past few years. Ferry and Smith both started a year or two ago.

Duncan, Shaq (Would have made through the finals), Bryant, T-Mac, Pierce (Would won at least one series in the last 7 years), Iverson, Malone, maybe Payton, Kidd, Marbury...

Duncan wasn't around every year, so it'd be tough to win, as was Kobe, T-Mac, Pierce, Marbury, and maybe more, i'm not sure exactly how much exp they all got. They would be lucky to get 30 wins this past year with Shaq. And Kidd and Payton definately couldn't. Remember when Marbury was here, and not just in Kg's place, along with him. Pierce wouldn't have one a series if he were in KG's place, i have no clue what u r thinking there. Iverson wouldn't either. Malone would have no chance this year with the Wolves, not even close. You really have no clue how good KG is. If you think guys like Marbury and Pierce are even close to him, u really have no clue at all.

How can you guys defend the +/- stat. The point of that stat is determining who's more valuable. People said a year ago that he didn't take over at the end of games, but guess what, he did this year. In fact, since you guys don't see the Wolves well have to look at stats, Teh Crunch Time Stat. Which again determines just how good a player is at the end of games, and again Kg is the best. And then the efficiency rating made by nba.com has Kg in 1st AGAIN. The only thing you guys can say bad about him is the playoff thing, which ISN'T HIS FAULT. His team is absolutely horrible. I don't know how you guys can sit here and say that the two teams are close, because they aren't. Did you guys watch anybody other than Duncan in the Spurs games this playoffs? The Spurs are an amazingly great team. They just dominated the Lakers, made them look like little girls. They sucked against the Nets and some agains tthe Mavs, but dominated against the good team. To repeat myself though, how do you argue against the HUGE diffencial in the +/- stat. The stat that DEFINES valuable. And it's not a close race, KG is FAR FAR FAR better than anybody else in the league. It's not even close. He's probly the best defender and rebounder in the game, i'd say ahead of Ben Wallace, but at least 2nd in both of those behind Ben. He's the most versitile defender. He can't hang with Shaq, but there are less than 5 guys in the league that stand a chance of not getting dominated by Shaq when's he's hungry. KG is a little guy, really skinny, so you can't blame him for not being able to guard Shaq.
I don't understadn why you guys don't realize that KG is the best. I doubt you read my firsst post then, cus that pretty much explained the whole thing, and you can't argue against the stuff inthere, cus it's right. I personally am a huge fan of Duncan. You might not believe me, but I am. During the playoffs everybody was calling Duncan boring, but I enjoyed watching him ALOT. Not in the Finals of course, that was horrible basketball by those two teams. KG is the best, face the facts.

Captain Obvious · 06-17-2003, 08:27 PM

Well said q i totally agree with you. I've made some posts defending Garnett in other threads like these and no one tries to counter the fact that Garnett is #1 in efficiency, crunch-time, and plus/minus. All they say is "Duncan knows how to win". Yeah, Garnett would too if he were on the Spurs instead of Duncan

pizzoni · 06-17-2003, 08:43 PM

So, you are saying that if the Lakers offer Shaq to the T´Wolves for Garnett they wouldn´t do it?!?!

Or If the Spurs offer Duncan to the T´Wolves for Garnett they wouldn´t do it????

I really think that McHale would jump in any of this trades.

Garnett isn´t just the Scorer that Duncar or Shaq are. I agree that Garnett is a better all aroud player then bout, but he isn´t near close in the Post player that Duncan or Shaq are.

Garnett is the 4th better player in the NBA.

Duncan
Shaq
Kobe
Garnett
T-Mac.

Pizzoni

socco · 06-17-2003, 08:49 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by pizzoni!
So, you are saying that if the Lakers offer Shaq to the T´Wolves for Garnett they wouldn´t do it?!?!

Or If the Spurs offer Duncan to the T´Wolves for Garnett they wouldn´t do it????

I really think that McHale would jump in any of this trades.

Garnett isn´t just the Scorer that Duncar or Shaq are. I agree that Garnett is a better all aroud player then bout, but he isn´t near close in the Post player that Duncan or Shaq are.

Garnett is the 4th better player in the NBA.

Duncan
Shaq
Kobe
Garnett
T-Mac.

Pizzoni

Yes, that is what I'm saying. And if he did, it would be for 1 reason only, Garnett saying that he will not resign. If he says he might, there's no way the Wolves would deal him, unless they get Shaq ADN Kobe, and that of course would never happen. Garnett is like .3 less in scoring than Duncan is. Kobe isn't nearly the post player Kg is, so why do you have him ahead? Your reason that KG isn't the best seems to be that he isn't a post player, even though he is good when he does play in the post. About 2/3 of the league aren't post players, so it doesn't make sense to put Duncan and Shaq ahead of KG just because of that.

Another thing for you guys who only have the fact that KG hasn't made it out of the 1st round. I have about 50 other things that i stated in my first post that are in favor of KG over Duncan, so the simple fact that he hasn't made it out of the first round(this is not even considering the fact that that's not his fault and not a legitimate diss on him) overrides all of those other things? That doesn't make sense at all.

**HKF** · 06-17-2003, 08:52 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by MagicStick!
Well said q i totally agree with you. I've made some posts defending Garnett in other threads like these and no one tries to counter the fact that Garnett is #1 in efficiency, crunch-time, and plus/minus. All they say is "Duncan knows how to win". Yeah, Garnett would too if he were on the Spurs instead of Duncan

But the numbers are similar, actually they are about the same, but all the intangibles go to Duncan. Duncan is damn near unstoppable in the 4th Quarter. His free-throw shooting sometimes is mediocre but in the last two games against the Nets he shot 80% which made fouling a bad proposition for the Nets. Tim Duncan dominates in the regular season and playoffs, not just the first round. When Garnett gets out of the FIRST ROUND ONCE, come talk to me and I will say he is on Duncan's level, that is unless Duncan wins another title next year also.

pizzoni · 06-17-2003, 09:04 PM

I believe that Garnett is a wonderfull player, but I don´t think he is better than Duncan or Shaq, look for the past seasons.

I agree that Garnett was the most improved player in the top ten player.

Like I wrote before, If Brandon was health I truly believe that the T´Wolves would content for the title the last two seasons.
(If Brandon play his best game, they would problably made one west final)

But, I truly believe too that Garnett support cast is as good as Duncan or T-Mac or Pierce (who only play with Walker and crap).

Quote:

Your reason that KG isn't the best seems to be that he isn't a post player, even though he is good when he does play in the post.

I not said that he isn´t a good post player, I said that he doesn´t have near the post game of Shaq or Duncan.

Pizzoni

socco · 06-17-2003, 09:22 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by pizzoni!
I believe that Garnett is a wonderfull player, but I don´t think he is better than Duncan or Shaq, look for the past seasons.

I agree that Garnett was the most improved player in the top ten player.

Like I wrote before, If Brandon was health I truly believe that the T´Wolves would content for the title the last two seasons.
(If Brandon play his best game, they would problably made one west final)

But, I truly believe too that Garnett support cast is as good as Duncan or T-Mac or Pierce (who only play with Walker and crap).

I not said that he isn´t a good post player, I said that he doesn´t have near the post game of Shaq or Duncan.

Pizzoni

Have you read my posts? The supporting Cast of Garnett compared to Duncan is not close. Pierce has some guy name Antoine Walker who is ok. McGrady's got nothing. McGrady and Peirce are both in the East too, it don't take much to win in the east. Your reason why Garnett isn't teh best player seems to be because he's not as good of a post player as Shaq or Duncan. Why is this your reason for who's the best player? When there are ALOT of reasons why Garnett IS the best player in the game, and all you have to say he's not is because he's not a post player. MJ was the best, he wasn't a post player. Your only reason for Kg not being the best is the fact that he's not a post player, so it doens't make sense.

socco · 06-17-2003, 09:25 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by newmessiah10!

But the numbers are similar, actually they are about the same, but all the intangibles go to Duncan. Duncan is damn near unstoppable in the 4th Quarter. His free-throw shooting sometimes is mediocre but in the last two games against the Nets he shot 80% which made fouling a bad proposition for the Nets. Tim Duncan dominates in the regular season and playoffs, not just the first round. When Garnett gets out of the FIRST ROUND ONCE, come talk to me and I will say he is on Duncan's level, that is unless Duncan wins another title next year also.

The numbers aren't that similar. For the main ones, they are close, but teh efficiency, +/-, and clutch rating, which are the most important because they say how good a player is overall, are all highly in favor of KG. He usually misses FTs towards the end, he missed two at the end of a Suns game, and then Marbury hit the game winner. Speaking of damn-near unstoppable, Kevin Garnett. I doubt you watch his much, so look at the Nestle Crunch Time Stat, KG is #1. So once Garnett gets a half way decent team around him that will put him on Duncan's level? That don't make sense.

socco · 06-17-2003, 09:31 PM

To sum up the argument why some think Duncan is better than KG, these are the things you guys have said so far here:
KG hasn't got out of the 1st round
KG isn't a dominant post player like Duncan

My response to that:
I'v compared the two teams a tleast twice so far, and the Spurs are much better. The only responses about this topic I've seen from you guys goes like this, "The Spurs supporting players aren't that much better than the Wolves." No explanation with it, just stating that. But I've gone through it a couple times and showed that it's not even close, in favor of the Spurs
Since when do we decide the best player in the league just because of where they play on the court? MJ was the best in his time and probly ever, and he wasn't a post player. So why is just the fact that Kg isn't as good of a post player as Duncan is enough to say that Duncan is better than KG? The answer, it's not enough.
Those are the only arguments I've seen so far, and they aren't that valid. Then add in all of the things I stated in my original post, but these two, even if they were accurate, are supposed to outway all those things favoring Garnett? I don't think so.

Thread Tools Display Modes

Thread Tools

Display Modes