Prime Kevin Garnett VS Prime Kobe Bryant (Who is better?)

[Chieflion]

In view of the Celtics-Lakers finals, let us bring up the past. Who was better in their prime? Kevin Garnett or Kobe Bryant?

http://artfiles.art.com/5/p/LRG/10/1011/SLJW000Z/kevin-garnett--04-nba-mvp-trophy-%C2%A9photofile.jpg

VS

http://thecalculation.files.wordpress.com/2009/06/kobe-bryant-mvp.jpg

[eisfeld]

But... but... but... Kobe would have carried the Wolves to a title

[TheMACHINE]

But... but... but... Kobe would have carried the Wolves to a title

really?

[TDMVPDPOY]

u stole this from realgm? it has 24 pages...

[TheMACHINE]

u stole this from realgm? it has 24 pages...

:wow:lmao

[jacobdrj]

KG has a lot of similarity to Pau in mentality. I'd build around KG. But I'd need a Kobe kinda guy for perimeter scoring to make it work. KG didn't have that until Paul Perice.

[Kindergarten Cop]

As much as I dislike Kobe, I still have to be realistic and state that this isn't even really a question. Of course a prime Kobe is/was better than a prime Garnett (although I strongly disagree with anyone that thinks that Kobe on the Wolves in lieu of Garnett would have brought the Timberwolves a championship).

[nkdlunch]

It's all about DOMINANCE. You always bet on the most dominant player. KG gets the nod over Kobe because he is a bigman.

Most dominant players in the last decade:
1. Shaq
2. TD
3. KG
4. Kobe

[mingus]

tough one. Kevin Garnett was unbelievable in his prime. he was just surrounded by pieces of shit. probably KG.

[Leetonidas]

It's hard to say who was BETTER...I think Kobe was probably the better, more talented player in his prime, but I would definitely take a prime Garnett over any other big man in the league except for prime Timmy and Shaq. And since he's a big and Kobe is a perimeter guy, I would rather have prime Garnett on my team because he was way more valuable in his prime than Kobe due to him being a better defender, rebounder, and an elite offensive player.

[mingus]

Garnett is a prime example of being surrounded by incompetence and people thinking that should be a psrt of his legacy.

[HarlemHeat37]

There's always a misconception about KG due to the fact that most NBA fans seem to dislike him..there are a lot of people that stupidly downplay his importance as Boston's best player in the 2008 playoffs, there's the misconception that he always disappears in big games, people overrated fringe players like Cassell and Sprewell to shit on Garnett..

I would take KG in his prime over Kobe..I don't think it's a big gap, but I wouldn't have to think about it too much, but I'm obviously bias due to my hatred for Kobe and the fact that KG is one of my favorites..

A prime Garnett was setting NBA history with consecutive 20-10-5 seasons..he was the best rebounder in the NBA at the time, leading or near the top in WS/48 and leading the NBA in PER, he had the best APM in the NBA, he took a mediocre supporting cast(for a title "contender") to the WCF, a top 3 defensive player in the NBA..

[Giuseppe]

I would take KG in his prime over Kobe

:rolleyes

[dirk4mvp]

Anyone who picks KG is just trolling lakerfans.

[Giuseppe]

........and they don't know shit from shinola about basketball.

[TheMACHINE]

Anyone who picks KG is just trolling lakerfans.

thats why none of the Lakers fans are biting. :lol

[stretch]

Kobe. No question about it.

[stretch]

It's hard to say who was BETTER...I think Kobe was probably the better, more talented player in his prime, but I would definitely take a prime Garnett over any other big man in the league except for prime Timmy and Shaq. And since he's a big and Kobe is a perimeter guy, I would rather have prime Garnett on my team because he was way more valuable in his prime than Kobe due to him being a better defender, rebounder, and an elite offensive player.

You're a fucking idiot.

[stretch]

There's always a misconception about KG due to the fact that most NBA fans seem to dislike him..there are a lot of people that stupidly downplay his importance as Boston's best player in the 2008 playoffs, there's the misconception that he always disappears in big games, people overrated fringe players like Cassell and Sprewell to shit on Garnett..

I would take KG in his prime over Kobe..I don't think it's a big gap, but I wouldn't have to think about it too much, but I'm obviously bias due to my hatred for Kobe and the fact that KG is one of my favorites..

A prime Garnett was setting NBA history with consecutive 20-10-5 seasons..he was the best rebounder in the NBA at the time, leading or near the top in WS/48 and leading the NBA in PER, he had the best APM in the NBA, he took a mediocre supporting cast(for a title "contender") to the WCF, a top 3 defensive player in the NBA..

You're a fucking idiot too.

[stretch]

It's all about DOMINANCE. You always bet on the most dominant player. KG gets the nod over Kobe because he is a bigman.

Most dominant players in the last decade:
1. Shaq
2. TD
3. KG
4. Kobe


tough one. Kevin Garnett was unbelievable in his prime. he was just surrounded by pieces of shit. probably KG.

More fucking idiots.

[TDMVPDPOY]

A prime Garnett was setting NBA history with consecutive 20-10-5 seasons..he was the best rebounder in the NBA at the time, leading or near the top in WS/48 and leading the NBA in PER, he had the best APM in the NBA, he took a mediocre supporting cast(for a title "contender") to the WCF, a top 3 defensive player in the NBA..

statpadding games dont mean shit if u dont win games

[Giuseppe]

statpadding games dont mean shit if u dont win games

And to his credit, Garnett understands that now. Hence his advice to James about time & loyalty.

[Juanobili]

Kobe

[Veterinarian]

Prime Garnett plus Prime Shaq bukkakes the rest of the NBA even worse than the Shaq-Kobe Lakers did.

[DAF86]

I don't know it's pretty close, those saying that nobody can honestly pick Garnett either forget how great this guy was or have just simply always underated his game.

[IronMexican]

I'd probably go Kobe.

[Giuseppe]

....and can tell shit from shinola.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

there's the misconception that he always disappears in big games


That's not a misconception, he is a choker. Great leader, great defensive anchor, but if you want someone to close a game out, you're sure as hell not taking Garnett.

[TDMVPDPOY]

That's not a misconception, he is a choker. Great leader, great defensive anchor, but if you want someone to close a game out, you're sure as hell not taking Garnett.

this is why i hate kg debates, cause we all know they will bring up the king series as his clutch performance when that is a small sample

[LnGrrrR]

Kobe. Even though KG is much more dominant defensively, I think Kobe plays good D, and just means more to his team. It's closer in my eyes than it probably is in many, though.

[Veterinarian]

Garnett and Shaq playing together would prolly allow 75 ppg with three average perimeter defenders.

[Giuseppe]

Kobe. Even though KG is much more dominant defensively, I think Kobe plays good D, and just means more to his team. It's closer in my eyes than it probably is in many, though.

Chasing your elbow round your asshole like that I'm shocked shitless you decided on Kobe.

[LnGrrrR]

Chasing your elbow round your asshole like that I'm shocked shitless you decided on Kobe.

:lol I can't tell you how many times during the 08 playoffs I was screaming "Just get in the post KG!" and being happily relieved as he made those stepback, turnaround jumpers. Heck, Kobe seems to get to the paint more than KG does.

[TDMVPDPOY]

dunno how u cam complain when u earn 1/3 of the teams payroll

[monosylab1k]

Kobe easily.

Garnett's entire career has been a bunch of great performances against terrible teams, fake-tough talk, and pussy ass cowering and backing down as soon as someone stands up to his bullshit.

I still remember multiple times when Garnett would try to punk Dirk, Dirk would just laugh in his face and then jizz all over him. You know you're a fake-tough pussy when even Dirk isn't intimidated.

[resistanze]

This question might be somewhat difficult to answer if it were "which player would you build around." Even then, I'm leaning towards Kobe.

But who was better? Seriously? I won't even answer that shit.

[Cry Havoc]

I'd give the slight edge to Kobe, because he has always been better in the 4th Quarter than Big Ticket.

[stretch]

I don't know it's pretty close, those saying that nobody can honestly pick Garnett either forget how great this guy was or have just simply always underated his game.

Or perhaps they just don't hate on how good Kobe is.

LMAO at picking a guy who has been known to be scared of taking big shots, and usually screws up badly when doing so.

[JamStone]

I'll take the guy that gets angry, dumps on his teammates, and demands a trade when he loses instead of the guy cries on national TV when he loses.

[Sisk]

Anyone who picks KG is just trolling lakerfans.

[Leetonidas]

You're a fucking idiot.

And you're a little bitch who spends way too much time trying to look cool on a message board. So, go fuck yourself faggot, and have a nice day. :toast

[baseline bum]

I'll take the guy that gets angry, dumps on his teammates, and demands a trade when he loses instead of the guy cries on national TV when he loses.



When did Garnett dump on his teammates and demand a trade? I remember him being pretty loyal to Minnesota and then finally agreeing that it was time to move on once they decided to blow up the team.

[stretch]

And you're a little bitch who spends way too much time trying to look cool on a message board. So, go fuck yourself faggot, and have a nice day. :toast

lol looking cool
lol telling someone to go fuck themselves
lol wishing them a nice day
lol you are super duper cool

[stretch]

When did Garnett dump on his teammates and demand a trade? I remember him being pretty loyal to Minnesota and then finally agreeing that it was time to move on once they decided to blow up the team.

He didn't. Kobe did.

[Leetonidas]

lol looking cool
lol telling someone to go fuck themselves
lol wishing them a nice day
lol you are super duper cool

Your schtick is tired. :sleep Have you ever seen a vagina before, aside from the last time you looked in the mirror?

[baseline bum]

BTW, I took Kobe, though I think it's closer than a lot of people are saying. They're both extremely versatile players, but Kobe's ability to get off and make the most difficult jumpshots I have seen since Bird puts him over the top to me.

[TheMACHINE]

i pick KG cuz KG's scowl crazier then Kobe's scowl.

[stretch]

Your schtick is tired. :sleep Have you ever seen a vagina before, aside from the last time you looked in the mirror?

lol calling me a vagina
lol calling me a virgin
lol you are more than super duper cool
lol drugs are super duper DUPER cool

[stretch]

BTW, I took Kobe, though I think it's closer than a lot of people are saying. They're both extremely versatile players, but Kobe's ability to get off and make the most difficult jumpshots I have seen since Bird puts him over the top to me.

*meow*

[DAF86]

Or perhaps they just don't hate on how good Kobe is.

LMAO at picking a guy who has been known to be scared of taking big shots, and usually screws up badly when doing so.

I'm an admitted Kobe hater but I think I never underestimated his game. This is not a who's better career wise debate, we're talking about primes. And Garnett on his prime was a beast and arguably the best player in the world just like Kobe.

[TDMVPDPOY]

BTW, I took Kobe, though I think it's closer than a lot of people are saying. They're both extremely versatile players, but Kobe's ability to get off and make the most difficult jumpshots I have seen since Bird puts him over the top to me.

u know those jumpshots are overrated right? if he misses ppl will call him a selfish chucker not passing the ball, he makes them they make it seem like he hits those on a regular basis, his more of a fluke

[monosylab1k]

he makes them they make it seem like he hits those on a regular basis

because he does.

[BRHornet45]

sons I hate Garnett, but will give props. In his prime he was twice the player Kobe ever was. Great scorer, excellent shooter, outstanding rebounder, etc.... Kobe on the other hand well, he just chucked up as many hail mary "I hope it goes in!" shots as possible and lived at the free throw line due to the league pushing him to the top.

[stretch]

I'm an admitted Kobe hater but I think I never underestimated his game. This is not a who's better career wise debate, we're talking about primes. And Garnett on his prime was a beast and arguably the best player in the world just like Kobe.

Maybe most versatile, but Garnett has never been offensively skilled enough to be considered the best player in the world. hell, hes never been the best PF in the world even. Duncan or Dirk were constantly superior PFs. The guy has never been an offensive stalwort, getting the majority of his points from offensive putbacks and his midrange jumper. he has almost no post moves, and pretty much relied on his athletic ability for his career. true, hes a great defender and rebounder, and that scoring isnt all the game is about, but if thats the case, then why isn't Dennis Rodman considered someone to build a team around, but Steve Nash is? Dennis Rodman basically is a beast at everything Nash is not, but everyone knows that Nash is greater than Rodman ever was. Why? Because in the end, offensive skills is where most true skills lie, whereas most of rebounding, defense, pick-setting, etc... is just about effort and athletic ability. Most every player is capable of being at least a very solid defender if they just gave the effort, but some are simply lazy, others are relied upon too much offensively that they have to conserve energy on defense.

Offensive abilities are still the #1 method of judging how good a player actually is.

[DAF86]

Maybe most versatile, but Garnett has never been offensively skilled enough to be considered the best player in the world. hell, hes never been the best PF in the world even. Duncan or Dirk were constantly superior PFs. The guy has never been an offensive stalwort, getting the majority of his points from offensive putbacks and his midrange jumper. he has almost no post moves, and pretty much relied on his athletic ability for his career. true, hes a great defender and rebounder, and that scoring isnt all the game is about, but if thats the case, then why isn't Dennis Rodman considered someone to build a team around, but Steve Nash is? Dennis Rodman basically is a beast at everything Nash is not, but everyone knows that Nash is greater than Rodman ever was. Why? Because in the end, offensive skills is where most true skills lie, whereas most of rebounding, defense, pick-setting, etc... is just about effort and athletic ability. Most every player is capable of being at least a very solid defender if they just gave the effort, but some are simply lazy, others are relied upon too much offensively that they have to conserve energy on defense.

Offensive abilities are still the #1 method of judging how good a player actually is.

If Garnett was as incompetent as Rodman in the offensive end you may have a point but Garnett has always been a good offensive player and in his prime he was one of the best offensive players on the league not only for his scoring but also for his ball handling and passing abilities. Kg and Dirk was never even a debate during Garnett's prime so I don't know how can you say that Dirk has consistenly been a superior PF.

[BadOdor]

If Garnett was as incompetent as Rodman in the offensive end you may have a point but Garnett has always been a good offensive player and in his prime he was one of the best offensive players on the league not only for his scoring but also for his ball handling and passing abilities. Kg and Dirk was never even a debate during Garnett's prime so I don't know how can you say that Dirk has consistenly been a superior PF.

You also think that manu>dirk, so no wonder no one takes you seriously.

lol manu>kg?

[DAF86]

You also think that manu>dirk, so no wonder no one takes you seriously.

lol manu>kg?

lol emo

[BadOdor]

lol emo

lol argentina

lol thinking manu>kg

[stretch]

If Garnett was as incompetent as Rodman in the offensive end you may have a point but Garnett has always been a good offensive player and in his prime he was one of the best offensive players on the league not only for his scoring but also for his ball handling and passing abilities. Kg and Dirk was never even a debate during Garnett's prime so I don't know how can you say that Dirk has consistenly been a superior PF.

I said Dirk OR Duncan. Either one or the other, you fucking Nazi moron. And I'd still take Dirk, as he constantly would rape the shit out of KG when facing each other, and always was able to more successfuly lead a team as the #1 guy. Garnett only ONCE got out of the first round as a #1, despite having some pretty solidly built teams. Never great teams, obviously, but definitely good enough to get past the 1st round, and most of the times, HE was the one holding the team back because he was too predictable offensively, and could never find ways to consistently make plays in clutch situations, almost always deferring to far lesser options.

The dudes complete lack of offensive SKILL has been showing for the past 3 years now, as he pretty much entirely relies on wide-open mid-range shots, and offensive putbacks. he could do a little more when in his prime because of his athleticism, but hes has NEVER been a truly skilled offensive player.

[DAF86]

lol argentina

lol thinking manu>kg

lol thinking about suicide

[IronMexican]

BadOdor thought about suicide. Way to lose cool points :td

[DAF86]

I said Dirk OR Duncan. Either one or the other, you fucking Nazi moron. And I'd still take Dirk, as he constantly would rape the shit out of KG when facing each other, and always was able to more successfuly lead a team as the #1 guy. Garnett only ONCE got out of the first round as a #1, despite having some pretty solidly built teams. Never great teams, obviously, but definitely good enough to get past the 1st round, and most of the times, HE was the one holding the team back because he was too predictable offensively, and could never find ways to consistently make plays in clutch situations, almost always deferring to far lesser options.

The dudes complete lack of offensive SKILL has been showing for the past 3 years now, as he pretty much entirely relies on wide-open mid-range shots, and offensive putbacks. he could do a little more when in his prime because of his athleticism, but hes has NEVER been a truly skilled offensive player.

Individual matchups don't determine that a player is better than the other. And KG's best teammates in Minnesota have been Sam Cassell, Latrell Sprewell and Wally fricking Szczerbiak. Dude never really had a chance there. Besides Garnett won a championship as the best player in his team in Boston.

[dirk4mvp]

Besides Garnett won a championship as the best player in his team in Boston.
lol

[DAF86]

lol

Take it from a Celtics fan

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/080416

[Höfner]

Kobe wins this one easy, but anything is POSSSIBBLLLLLLLLLEEEEEEEEEEEE

[Roddy Beaubois]

Take it from a Celtics fan

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/080416

:lmao

DAF probably has that as his homepage because Simmons put manu high on the list.

[Veterinarian]

he has almost no post moves

Crofl, you know shit about basketball. Garnett's a very skilled post player. He just doesn't have the bulk to dominate offensively in the post. He's still a 22+ ppg scorer. Combining him with Shaq instantly makes the other team have zero chance to get anything but dominated from 10 feet in.

[Muser]

BadOdor thought about suicide. Way to lose cool points :td

Where he say that?

And Kobe was better.

[Ghazi]

I think its closer than some think, but went with Kobe.

stretch.. since Duncan is a center I think KG was the best PF in the league at some points. KG in '08 > Dirk in '08. I know that coincides with when his teammates getting better but it seemed to rejuvenate him as well...best player on an all time great team . and probably KG before 2004-2005 > Dirk. IMO,

[stretch]

Individual matchups don't determine that a player is better than the other. And KG's best teammates in Minnesota have been Sam Cassell, Latrell Sprewell and Wally fricking Szczerbiak. Dude never really had a chance there. Besides Garnett won a championship as the best player in his team in Boston.

Cassel, Sprewell, and Szczerbiak were some pretty damn good role players at that time. Szczerbiak isn't nearly as bad as you and other make him out to be, the dude was a very solid ball player back then. I mean those are three guys who were capable of going off for 25+ points on any given night. Not bad at all.

Also, if you are deferring to two other players in crunch situations, you are not the best player on your team. Maybe the emotional leader and defensive anchor of Boston, but that's about it.

[HarlemHeat37]

Wow, that was an absolutely horrible post from stretch, disgusting hyperbole there..you're also completely disregarding passing, where Garnett is one of the best passing big men in NBA history, certainly the best in my lifetime..

I don't have a problem with anybody picking Kobe, but I don't see any argument for saying "easily"..I have yet to see any arguments in this thread, people are just picking Kobe and the majority haven't explained why..

I think some people have forgotten how dominant Garnett was in his prime, or have just chosen to forget about it..KG's peak in 2004 was a completely dominant season, and I don't know if Kobe has any season that could match Garnett's dominance that year..

Garnett led the NBA in PER(a box score stat, so it pretty much kills the notion that Garnett wasn't a great offensive player, it would be impossible to lead a box score stat without being very good offensively IMO), Win Shares/48(led it by a HUGE margin, only Duncan coming close), led the NBA in rebounding(by a significant margin), won the MVP award..he was #3 in defensive rating, only trailing Ben Wallace and Duncan, so his impact was massive on both ends..

He was #1 in the NBA in +/- by a MASSIVE margin..the Wolves were a ridiculous 19.6 points better when Garnett was on the floor that season, higher than 2nd place in the league by a disgusting 7+ points..one of the highest margins and one of the highest numbers for this stat in NBA history..Garnett had the highest +/- of any player of the post-Jordan era..part of the reason is because of his bad teams, so it's inflated, but it clearly shows his value to his horrible supporting casts..

Garnett joined Kareem as the only player in NBA history to average 20/10/5 with 1.5 SPG and BPG in a season, and unlike Kareem, he didn't do it during the extremely fast pace of the 70s..

In the playoffs, he led his team in PPG, RPG, APG and BPG and took a Wolves team with a 34-year old Sam Cassell and a 33-year old Spree as his main options, losing to a Lakers team with Shaq/Kobe/Malone/Payton after Sam Cassell missed HALF the series..

Also, knocking a player for his athletic ability is incredibly stupid..

[DAF86]

:lmao

DAF probably has that as his homepage because Simmons put manu high on the list.

Is Manu in the list? I swear to God I didn't see it. I was actually looking for the official MVP voting ballot where KG finished third but I came across this and thought it was better. I guess I will have to keep reading it.

[stretch]

I think its closer than some think, but went with Kobe.

stretch.. since Duncan is a center I think KG was the best PF in the league at some points. KG in '08 > Dirk in '08 for example. and probably KG before 2004-2005 > Dirk. IMO,

Dirk in 08 > KG in 08.

KG had Paul Pierce and Ray Allen (playing second fiddle to Pierce and Allen obviously is/was hella good)

Dirk had Brandon Bass (by far the 2nd best player for the Mavs in the playoffs)

[Veterinarian]

:lmao at stretch. If I had never seen KG play I would think he was Horace Grant 2.0 based on his shit posts in this thread.

[Roddy Beaubois]

Is Manu in the list? I swear to God I didn't see it. I was actually looking for the official MVP voting ballot where KG finished third but I came across this and thought it was better. I guess I will have to keep reading it.

:lol ok bud

[stretch]

:lmao at stretch. If I had never seen KG play I would think he was Horace Grant 2.0 based on his shit posts in this thread.

All I've said is that Garnett never has been very skilled offensively, usually relying on athleticism for his scoring. About the only true offensive skill he has is a mid-range jumper, and a fade-away.

[stretch]

Crofl, you know shit about basketball. Garnett's a very skilled post player. He just doesn't have the bulk to dominate offensively in the post. He's still a 22+ ppg scorer. Combining him with Shaq instantly makes the other team have zero chance to get anything but dominated from 10 feet in.

Show me what skills Garnett employs that consistently gets him points, aside from a wide open mid-range jumper, and a turnaround fadeaway that is rather inconsistent these days.

[DAF86]

Is Manu in the list? I swear to God I didn't see it. I was actually looking for the official MVP voting ballot where KG finished third but I came across this and thought it was better. I guess I will have to keep reading it.

As an atheist I don't know why I sometimes use that phrase.

[HarlemHeat37]

Garnett in 2008 had the same or higher +/- than Dirk, despite having a better supporting cast, which means his value exceeded Nowitzki's by a good margin..he won the DPOY, he finished in the top 5 in MVP voting..

Despite being at the end of his prime, he led the Celtics in PPG during the playoffs, which is pretty crazy considering stretch believes he's some kind of average offensive player..

Garnett did all of that, + lead his team in PER and WS, + lead his team in RPG, + most important of all, lead his team to a title, yet Nowitzki was better that year?..

[DAF86]

:lol ok bud

I remember now that I read it before but it's true that I didn't remember about Manu beign on it.

[stretch]

Wow, that was an absolutely horrible post from stretch, disgusting hyperbole there..you're also completely disregarding passing, where Garnett is one of the best passing big men in NBA history, certainly the best in my lifetime..

I don't have a problem with anybody picking Kobe, but I don't see any argument for saying "easily"..I have yet to see any arguments in this thread, people are just picking Kobe and the majority haven't explained why..

I think some people have forgotten how dominant Garnett was in his prime, or have just chosen to forget about it..KG's peak in 2004 was a completely dominant season, and I don't know if Kobe has any season that could match Garnett's dominance that year..

Garnett led the NBA in PER(a box score stat, so it pretty much kills the notion that Garnett wasn't a great offensive player, it would be impossible to lead a box score stat without being very good offensively IMO), Win Shares/48(led it by a HUGE margin, only Duncan coming close), led the NBA in rebounding(by a significant margin), won the MVP award..he was #3 in defensive rating, only trailing Ben Wallace and Duncan, so his impact was massive on both ends..

He was #1 in the NBA in +/- by a MASSIVE margin..the Wolves were a ridiculous 19.6 points better when Garnett was on the floor that season, higher than 2nd place in the league by a disgusting 7+ points..one of the highest margins and one of the highest numbers for this stat in NBA history..Garnett had the highest +/- of any player of the post-Jordan era..part of the reason is because of his bad teams, so it's inflated, but it clearly shows his value to his horrible supporting casts..

Garnett joined Kareem as the only player in NBA history to average 20/10/5 with 1.5 SPG and BPG in a season, and unlike Kareem, he didn't do it during the extremely fast pace of the 70s..

In the playoffs, he led his team in PPG, RPG, APG and BPG and took a Wolves team with a 34-year old Sam Cassell and a 33-year old Spree as his main options, losing to a Lakers team with Shaq/Kobe/Malone/Payton after Sam Cassell missed HALF the series..

Also, knocking a player for his athletic ability is incredibly stupid..

No one said Garnett wasn't good, moron. Just that Kobe is better, because he simply is.

And I never knocked him for his athletic ability. Just said that his athleticism was his main source of scoring, not his skill, because he's not very skilled offensively, and it's been showing more and more each year as his athleticism declines.

[HarlemHeat37]

BTW, during the 2008 playoffs, going by 82games' "clutch" definition(which is flawed, but it doesn't really change the point here), Garnett took 20 FGA per 48 in clutch time, while Pierce took 15 and Allen took 17..so let's not act like KG was scared to put up the shots when it mattered..

He isn't a notable player in those moments, but he isn't some kind of liability like people make him out to be, not even close..

[stretch]

Garnett in 2008 had the same or higher +/- than Dirk, despite having a better supporting cast, which means his value exceeded Nowitzki's by a good margin..he won the DPOY, he finished in the top 5 in MVP voting..

Despite being at the end of his prime, he led the Celtics in PPG during the playoffs, which is pretty crazy considering stretch believes he's some kind of average offensive player..

Garnett did all of that, + lead his team in PER and WS, + lead his team in RPG, + most important of all, lead his team to a title, yet Nowitzki was better that year?..

+/- is bullshit. anyone who knows basketball knows that.

[Roddy Beaubois]

If were gonna start talking advanced states....


How can you have Dirk Nowitzki over Kevin Garnett?

In my opinion, Nowitzki, although thought of highly by most people, still manages to be underrated. Consider:

Nowitzki earned a decade-best 137.6 Win Shares during the regular season.
Nowitzki finished fifth in the decade with 17.4 playoff Win Shares, but while Nowitzki played in only 97 playoff games, no one above him played him in fewer than 133 games.
Nowitzki is an almost perfect blend of productivity and efficiency. Among players with at least 400 games played during the decade, he had the 15th-highest usage percentage, the 8th-lowest turnover percentage, and the 6th-highest offensive rating.
The Mavericks have won 50 or more games nine consecutive seasons, including seasons of 60 and 67 wins after losing two-time MVP Steve Nash. The one constant during this streak? Nowitzki.
None of this is meant to slight Garnett, who I think is a great player. I just think — and this system happens to agree — that Nowitzki was a little bit greater.

and yes, DAF, you can use the same homepage joke.

[stretch]

BTW, during the 2008 playoffs, going by 82games' "clutch" definition(which is flawed, but it doesn't really change the point here), Garnett took 20 FGA per 48 in clutch time, while Pierce took 15 and Allen took 17..so let's not act like KG was scared to put up the shots when it mattered..

percentages?

also, Pierce + Allen = 27. A true number one option should not be deferring more than half the time on big shots.

[HarlemHeat37]

+/- is bullshit. anyone who knows basketball knows that.

Adjusted +/- isn't bullshit, especially when you're looking at it over an entire season and when you're comparing superstar players..it's not a primary argument(no stat is), but it at least tells a story about the player's value to his team..

[HarlemHeat37]

percentages?

also, Pierce + Allen = 27. A true number one option should not be deferring more than half the time on big shots.

Were Duncan and Shaq true #1 options?..

Duncan has had no problem deferring to Parker and Ginobili in clutch time, and Shaq didn't have problems deferring to Kobe when their teams needed it..

[eisfeld]

really?

Nah... even Kobe couldn't have done that.

Garnett was a nice player but not a leader. Even with a good Wolves team he couldn't win anything. But I also doubt Kobe couldn't it.

Still... judging from their prime it's a no-brainer. Kobe carried the Lakers to several post-season appearences with an inferior time while Garnett couldn't do anything.

Just to be honest:
Kobe is a pain in the ass - maybe a rapist, maybe not on MJ level, maybe not a leader but definitely a guy who can carry a shitty team to the Playoffs because he has actually some leading skills and his explosiveness is just amazing.

Long story short, Kobe prime >>> Garnett

[21_Blessings]

The answer is obviously Kobe. No point in even discussing it.

Although, Prime KG > Prime Dirk

[Höfner]

Although, Prime KG > Prime Dirk

Only people I ever heard say different were mav homers.

[DAF86]

Nah... even Kobe couldn't have done that.

Garnett was a nice player but not a leader. Even with a good Wolves team he couldn't win anything. But I also doubt Kobe couldn't it.

Still... judging from their prime it's a no-brainer. Kobe carried the Lakers to several post-season appearences with an inferior time while Garnett couldn't do anything.

Just to be honest:
Kobe is a pain in the ass - maybe a rapist, maybe not on MJ level, maybe not a leader but definitely a guy who can carry a shitty team to the Playoffs because he has actually some leading skills and his explosiveness is just amazing.

Long story short, Kobe prime >>> Garnett

I'm guessing you didn't read that Bill Simmons article.

[Veterinarian]

Show me what skills Garnett employs that consistently gets him points, aside from a wide open mid-range jumper, and a turnaround fadeaway that is rather inconsistent these days.

He's beyond washed up now, of course it's inconsistent. Oscar Robertson's jumper is probably inconsistent these days too.

When he was young he could pump fake to get people in the air and then drive by them, plus he had a series of spin moves in the post and running hooks and layups that could be devastating. He just never had a dominant scorers mentality or the bulk to dominate by the basket. Of course if you paired him with a prime Shaq or a prime Gasol to get his titles this would matter much less.


Dirk in 08 > KG in 08.

KG had Paul Pierce and Ray Allen (playing second fiddle to Pierce and Allen obviously is/was hella good)

Dirk had Brandon Bass (by far the 2nd best player for the Mavs in the playoffs)

Turd in your punch bowl: defense. Bet you never mention it.

[Roddy Beaubois]

Only people I ever heard say different were mav homers.

and the quote I posted :wakeup

[Höfner]

and the quote I posted :wakeup

Shouldn't you be packing your bags for Cleveland?

[stretch]

Adjusted +/- isn't bullshit, especially when you're looking at it over an entire season and when you're comparing superstar players..it's not a primary argument(no stat is), but it at least tells a story about the player's value to his team..

if you have a shit team, your +/- is going to be crappier if you are a superstar level player. if you have a badass team, your +/- is going to look good, despite being a shit player. case in point: Michael Finley had a better +/- than T-Mac, Shaq, and Kobe back in 2003.

[Roddy Beaubois]

Shouldn't you be packing your bags for Cleveland?

good comeback :wakeup

[stretch]

plus he had a series of spin moves in the post and running hooks and layups that could be devastating.

No. Against elite teams, his offensive ability never has been devastating, and never will be. He may have been able to do that stuff to guys like Evan Eschmeyer or Mark Madsen, but not against good defenses with guys like Timmy D, Rasheed, or Ben Wallace

[HarlemHeat37]

if you have a shit team, your +/- is going to be crappier if you are a superstar level player. if you have a badass team, your +/- is going to look good, despite being a shit player. case in point: Michael Finley had a better +/- than T-Mac, Shaq, and Kobe back in 2003.

I agree, I acknowledged that, but I'm talking about APM too, not just normal +/-..you said Dirk had a worse supporting cast than Garnett in 2008, which is obviously true, yet Garnett still managed to have a better(I don't remember exactly) +/-..so I'm arguing that KG was clearly more valuable to the 2008 Celtics than Dirk was to his team from a success standpoint..

BTW, adjusted +/- isn't the same as normal +/-..it actually accounts for teammates as well as possible..

[Veterinarian]

No. Against elite teams, his offensive ability never has been devastating, and never will be. He may have been able to do that stuff to guys like Evan Eschmeyer or Mark Madsen, but not against good defenses with guys like Timmy D, Rasheed, or Ben Wallace

You cherrypicked that out and missed the following sentence. Talk about Dirk's D for a few sentences. And talk about the difference between an average defensive player and a top 5 guy in the league.

[stretch]

I agree, I acknowledged that, but I'm talking about APM too, not just normal +/-..you said Dirk had a worse supporting cast than Garnett in 2008, which is obviously true, yet Garnett still managed to have a better(I don't remember exactly) +/-..so I'm arguing that KG was clearly more valuable to the 2008 Celtics than Dirk was to his team from a success standpoint..

You are an idiot. Do you even realize what you just said?

[Veterinarian]

You are an idiot. Do you even realize what you just said?

crofl the guy who makes KG sound like Horace Grant just called someone an idiot.

[stretch]

You cherrypicked that out and missed the following sentence. Talk about Dirk's D for a few sentences. And talk about the difference between an average defensive player and a top 5 guy in the league.

Dirk's D is mediocre a lot of the time, but when he tries to play defense, he can actually be quite solid. Proof that defense is mostly a matter of effort and energy, not a skill.

Skills and effort are very different things.

[namlook]

KG, they guy who always passed and was afraid to make a clutch play with the game on the line for his entire career? Yeah he was better. Bwhahahahahaha! :lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao

[DAF86]

Dirk's D is mediocre a lot of the time, but when he tries to play defense, he can actually be quite solid. Proof that defense is mostly a matter of effort and energy, not a skill.

Skills and effort are very different things.

I don't think Dirk's defensive problems are a case of lack of effort, he isn't a lazy player imo, I think his defensive impact would be much bigger with the same effort he's putting right now but with better lateral movement and jumping ability.

[Veterinarian]

Dirk's D is mediocre a lot of the time, but when he tries to play defense, he can actually be quite solid. Proof that defense is mostly a matter of effort and energy, not a skill.

Skills and effort are very different things.

I've never seem a simpler, more ignorant explanation of playing defense in the NBA. You basically said "you just have to play hard". Like Garnett just plays harder than Dirk sometimes. That's the only difference.

[Killakobe81]

LOL yall most be bored Kobe and KG are not even in the same league ...

Dirk and KG is closer but Offensively Dirk is better ...defense KG

But even though dirk has put up the better numbers ...

KG is a better offensive player than dirk is a defender

IMHO opinion KG>Dirk both in prime ...BUT KG is fading fast ...

[stretch]

I've never seem a simpler, more ignorant explanation of playing defense in the NBA. You basically said "you just have to play hard". Like Garnett just plays harder than Dirk sometimes. That's the only difference.

Sure, there is some defensive IQ involved and such, but that isn't what Dirk's defensive issues revolves around, as he usually tends to be in good defensive position, he just doesnt attempt to contest shots very well. That's almost entirely a matter of laziness.

[ffadicted]

KG took a shit wolves team to the conf finals. Kobe took a shitty LA team to the lottery.

k

[BadOdor]

BadOdor thought about suicide. Way to lose cool points :td

link?

[Veterinarian]

Sure, there is some defensive IQ involved and such, but that isn't what Dirk's defensive issues revolves around, as he usually tends to be in good defensive position, he just doesnt attempt to contest shots very well. That's almost entirely a matter of laziness.

Look man, staying in front of or with a guy is most definitely a skill. You need lateral quickness. Its analogous to playing cornerback in the NFL. Are you going to say Darell Revis isn't skilled? And that all he has to is run hard and follow people around? Shit most corners run hard but can't stay with wide receivers and tons of sfs play hard on defense and they aren't Scottie Pippen.

[BadOdor]

sons, kg>dirk. With all due respect to dirk, the edge he has on kg in scoring is more than made up for with kg's passing, defense and rebounding.

[jdev82]

KG averaged 23 points, 13 rebounds, 6 assists and 2 blocks in his prime, kobe averaged 35 5 and 5. both made the playoffs and lost. who cares

[boston.balla]

kg stomps dirk's ass you meowing sissy cuckolds known as mav fans. We're not talking statpadding here we talking about impact on the game including the mental facet (see 2008 mavfan to understand wtf this means)

Do you think a team with kg lets dwade jizz all over them?
Do you remember the impact kg had in his prime?
Do you remember that when kobe put up huge ppg the lakers were shit and he dragged the team down due to overdomination of the ball?
Do you understand what a prime shaq and a prime kg do to the league?

Damn man, this kind of idiocy is too blatant to be true even for a fat beaner mav fan so in the spirit of cherishing such accomplished minds let me add: here's to mavs first title next year with lebron dirk dwade on da krew:

ANYTHING IS POSSIBLEEE!!!
including choking what should have been 3-0 leads in the finals .. shall i call it double choking?

[cobbler]

Adjusted +/- isn't bullshit, especially when you're looking at it over an entire season and when you're comparing superstar players..it's not a primary argument(no stat is), but it at least tells a story about the player's value to his team..

Says the guy who argues constantly with stats and say such things as work ethic, hustle, determination, and leadership are overrated.

:lol:lol:lol:lol @ +/-

friggen moron

[JamStone]

KG took a shit wolves team to the conf finals. Kobe took a shitty LA team to the lottery.

k

Ummm KG also took a shit Wolves team to three consecutive lottery seasons...

[monosylab1k]

Although, Prime KG > Prime Dirk

Yet somehow, every time prime Garnett went up against prime Dirk, Dirk has curmbstomped him. And I'm not talking just wins/losses, I'm talking the two of them going head to head and Dirk giving KG a golden shower damn near every time.

Historically Dirk has owned KG almost as hard as he's owned Gasol.

[monosylab1k]

Not saying Dirk > KG overall, historically Amare Stoudemire has owned Dirk. Just saying, KG gets jizzed on by Dirk regularly, and it's been like that for a decade now.

[TheMACHINE]

what years are prime KG and Prime Kobe?

[Chieflion]

what years are prime KG and Prime Kobe?

If I consider Prime Garnett 2002-2005 and Kobe from 2005-2008, would that be fair to everyone?

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

what years are prime KG and Prime Kobe?


IMO as individual players Kobe's prime was 2006-2008 and KG's prime was 2003-2005.

[DPG21920]

Wow, Stretch. The worst arguments ever.

[TheMACHINE]

If I consider Prime Garnett 2002-2005 and Kobe from 2005-2008, would that be fair to everyone?

well if you do that, then it'll be hands down Kobe, so to make the Kobe haters happy, you should probably change it.

[Chieflion]

well if you do that, then it'll be hands down Kobe, so to make the Kobe haters happy, you should probably change it.

How would it be hands down Kobe? I would like to hear your argument.

[Kori Ellis]

:lol How is this a question? Prime Kobe without a doubt. He's one of the top three players of all time. How could Prime Garnett be better?

And on another note...I hate the argument that KG had no supporting cast in Minny as a defense for their playoff suckitude. He had Marbury for two years when Marbury averaged 18/9. He had Terrell Brandon for four years averaging around 16/8, etc.

[DesignatedT]

lol garnett.

Kobe>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>KG

[mingus]

Kobe worked with the same pieces of shit from 04-07 that Garnett had to work with basically his whole tenure in Minny, except in 03-04, when Garnett had Spree and Sam Cassell. people arguing that Kobe leadership> KG's leadership are stupid. Kobe isn't even the leader of the Lakers. Derek Fisher and Phil Jackson are. Kobe is still the same guy that constantly threw his teammates under the bus, and whom Phil Jackson called "unchoachable." the only difference now is that he has nothing to bitch about. i judge a guy's leadership partly on how he does when the ship is sinking and Bryant historically fails at this. he's the first to abandon ship.

the only thing that Kobe has over KG is his scoring ability and clutchness. KG superior at everything else.

[mingus]

:lol How is this a question? Prime Kobe without a doubt. He's one of the top three players of all time. How could Prime Garnett be better?

And on another note...I hate the argument that KG had no supporting cast in Minny as a defense for their playoff suckitude. He had Marbury for two years when Marbury averaged 18/9. He had Terrell Brandon for four years averaging around 16/8, etc.

c'mon these guys weren't that spectacular.

[21_Blessings]

Yet somehow, every time prime Garnett went up against prime Dirk, Dirk has curmbstomped him. And I'm not talking just wins/losses, I'm talking the two of them going head to head and Dirk giving KG a golden shower damn near every time.

Historically Dirk has owned KG almost as hard as he's owned Gasol.

Historically Dirk has had a steady stream of talent next him for an entire decade. Couldn't win jack with it and horribly under achieved in embarrassing fashion some years.

Whereas Minny KG teams would consistently over achieve and rarely shit the bed against lower seeded team.

Objectively and realistically there is absolutely no argument for Dirk > KG. It's not even close. Dirk is a 6'11 one-trick pony shooting guard that has to be hidden defensively at times.

[monosylab1k]

Historically Dirk has had a steady stream of talent next him for an entire decade.

Yeah when I think "stellar supporting cast" the first thing that comes to mind is a 6-2 streak shooter that plays no defense, a pothead with the IQ of a duck, an incredibly fast flopper that unfortunately couldn't beat a 5th grader at HORSE, and Erick Dampier.

Outside of Nash & Finley, Dirk hasn't had an All-Star caliber teammate around him. One of year of Jamison was unfortunately cancelled out by Walker.

[dirk4mvp]

Yeah when I think "stellar supporting cast" the first thing that comes to mind is a 6-2 streak shooter that plays no defense, a pothead with the IQ of a duck, an incredibly fast flopper that unfortunately couldn't beat a 5th grader at HORSE, and Erick Dampier.

2 time mvp Steve Nash, tbh

[21_Blessings]

Mav Fan defends like every Cuban move ever then pulls "they were overrated card" when talking about Dirk's legacy.

No actually. Dirk is an overrated pansy that can only play one side of the ball effectively.

[monosylab1k]

Mav Fan defends like every Cuban move ever then pulls "they were overrated card" when talking about Dirk's legacy.

Everyone acting like KG's best teammate in Minnesota was Mark Madsen is even worse. Sam Cassell in his Minnesota days is a better player than anyone Dirk has played with post-Nash.

[dirk4mvp]

Mav Fan defends like every Cuban move ever then pulls "they were overrated card" when talking about Dirk's legacy.

No actually. Dirk is an overrated pansy that can only play one side of the ball effectively.

You're so insecure. It shines through with every post you make.

[Kobe Bryant Fan]

What an insult to Kobe Bryant. He obviously wins because he scores more points.

[mystargtr34]

There's always a misconception about KG due to the fact that most NBA fans seem to dislike him..there are a lot of people that stupidly downplay his importance as Boston's best player in the 2008 playoffs, there's the misconception that he always disappears in big games, people overrated fringe players like Cassell and Sprewell to shit on Garnett..

I would take KG in his prime over Kobe..I don't think it's a big gap, but I wouldn't have to think about it too much, but I'm obviously bias due to my hatred for Kobe and the fact that KG is one of my favorites..

A prime Garnett was setting NBA history with consecutive 20-10-5 seasons..he was the best rebounder in the NBA at the time, leading or near the top in WS/48 and leading the NBA in PER, he had the best APM in the NBA, he took a mediocre supporting cast(for a title "contender") to the WCF, a top 3 defensive player in the NBA..

So all Mavfans are pretty much going to keep shitting on Garnett? I wonder why...

For me, in their primes it has to be KG. HarlemHeat pretty much summarized it perfectly... he was pretty much the LeBron James of 2000-2005 in terms of his statistical dominance, no one had done what KG had done EVER.

[Spursfan092120]

Stupid ass poll. Kobe, by a long shot. Prime Kobe is top 5 all time, Garnett ain't close.

[monosylab1k]

:lmao at calling Cassell and Sprewell "fringe players".

[JamStone]

In each of their primes, they were both great players. KG in his prime was very good at everything, a very good scorer, an excellent rebounder, great versatile defender, and played unselfishly. Kobe in his prime was also very good to great at everything for his position, was one of the best scorers in the league, very good but slightly overrated defender, very good but not great playmaker and rebounder for his position.

The distinction isn't in stats necessarily. It isn't in locker room leadership or attitude or heart or popularity.

The distinction is that Kobe could (and still can) completely take over a game and win it single-handedly and would do it quite often. Even when KG would dominate the boards or even if he put up a 30+ point game here and there, it was almost quietly done. You knew KG was a great player and would be a force on the boards and on his offensive end, but you simply didn't fear him the way you would fear Kobe taking over the game. It's been proven over both of their respective careers that KG in his prime was a great player who could be a difference maker but better suited as a superstar role player, while Kobe was the guy who would demand the ball be in his hands and proceed to tear the other team's heart out.

Don't have to look at stats. Don't have to look at all star or all NBA honors. Don't have to look at team wins and losses. KG was the guy who's all around game you had a great deal of respect for, while Kobe was the guy you feared.

That's why the answer is simple.

[monosylab1k]

Must be a cock thing.:rollin

You are really into dicks. Must be a Paki thing.

[ezau]

KG easily. If KG had someone like Bynum and even Ariza with him all along, he's going to be more successful than kobe

[JamStone]

Interesting how some Spurs fans are choosing KG over Kobe when both Tim Duncan and Gregg Popovich have called Kobe the greatest player on the planet.

Does that mean KG > Kobe > Duncan?

[HarlemHeat37]

Kobe has been better than Garnett since 2006 and he's been as good or better than Duncan since then as well, so the fact that the media and coaches/players have been jocking him since 2006 doesn't really change anything..no arguing that he's been better than both during that time(Duncan was better in 2007 IMO, but it doesn't really change anything)..

I don't see your point though..are you saying Garnett in 2004 didn't have an argument as the best player on the planet for that season?..no, he definitely wasn't clear-cut, but Kobe has never been the clear-cut best player in any season, not even his lone MVP season..

Kobe has the advantage of entering his prime during the Youtube/hype media of the NBA, where interviewers are always asking other players and coaches about him, always hyping him up..people on twitter write shit, and his fans use it as an argument..

In all my time as an NBA fan, I never even once remember an interviewer asking other players or coaches about the best player in the NBA while Shaq, Duncan and Garnett(for one season) were on top of the NBA, adding to the revisionist history that Kobe receives..

It's amazing how quickly everybody forgot about the dominance of these 3 guys, especially Shaq and Duncan, since they're both top 10 players..

[Spursfan092120]

Interesting how some Spurs fans are choosing KG over Kobe when both Tim Duncan and Gregg Popovich have called Kobe the greatest player on the planet.

Does that mean KG > Kobe > Duncan?
Not this Spurs fan.

[HarlemHeat37]

:lmao at calling Cassell and Sprewell "fringe players".

I obviously didn't mean fringe NBA players, I should have worded it better..I meant fringe All-Star caliber players, like a Mo Williams would be in Cassell's case(although Sam was better)..

[ezau]

Interesting how some Spurs fans are choosing KG over Kobe when both Tim Duncan and Gregg Popovich have called Kobe the greatest player on the planet.

Does that mean KG > Kobe > Duncan?

lol. Post-Jordan, the greatest players on the planet were Shaq and Duncan. Kobe's best year, 08 was even question since CP3 played out of his mind all season long. Kobe's reign as the best was brief and sadly, it was immediately snatched away by Lebron.

[HarlemHeat37]

Can anybody that thinks prime Kobe is a top 5 player of all-time make an argument for it?..Kobe is regarded as highly as he is due to his longevity IMO, his peak isn't really up here(in the top 5 range) IMO, I don't see how it would be..

[ezau]

and oh, when Kobe won his lone MVP trophy in 08, he got cumberstomped to death by the Celtics. To be the best, you gotta have the ring at the end of the year, which Shaq and Duncan did for most part of the Decade.

[TD 21]

-Sabonis, Divac and Webber were all better passing big men than Garnett.

-The difficult part with Bryant is discerning his prime or peak, but Garnett's peak was better than Bryant's (whatever stretch you want to pick).

-That being said, it's close enough to where I see the argument for Bryant. As overrated as he is in the clutch (granted, he's had a great season in the clutch), he's still much more reliable and relishes the moment far more than Garnett has ever been.

-I have never heard Duncan call Bryant the best player on the planet. Best scorer, yes, but not player.

-Bryant wasn't better than Duncan until '08 and for a good eight year stretch, there wasn't even an argument to be made.

-Nowitzki shouldn't be mentioned in the same breathe as prime Garnett, that's just more revisionist history.

-Thinking back to prime O'Neal, Duncan and Garnett compared to the so-called best big men of today, Howard and Gasol, it shows you how far big man play has fallen off. Probably at any other point in the last 50 years, neither Howard nor Gasol would be considered the league's premier big man or even second, in fact, they'd have almost always been considered second tier big men.

[monosylab1k]

I obviously didn't mean fringe NBA players, I should have worded it better..I meant fringe All-Star caliber players, like a Mo Williams would be in Cassell's case(although Sam was better)..

Well Sprewell went to 4 all-star games, Cassell only 1, which was during his time in Minny. They both got All-NBA honors at points in there career, Cassell again making it on the 2nd team with Minnesota.

I'd say that's a definite step above the Mo Williams/Josh Howard/Jason Terry/etc caliber of player.

The revisionist history that Garnett played with a bunch of nobodies in Minnesota is ridiculous.

[HarlemHeat37]

Well Sprewell went to 4 all-star games, Cassell only 1, which was during his time in Minny. They both got All-NBA honors at points in there career, Cassell again making it on the 2nd team with Minnesota.

I'd say that's a definite step above the Mo Williams/Josh Howard/Jason Terry/etc caliber of player.

The revisionist history that Garnett played with a bunch of nobodies in Minnesota is ridiculous.

I'll give you Cassell, I fell into the hyperbole trap with that one, I'll give him credit for that season, I said he was better than a Williams-type, but ya, he's even better than what I said I guess..still, when the playoffs came, he wasn't a legit #2 option, more like a #3..Cassell also missed half the WCF though, and who knows what would have happened had he played, Garnett could have made the Finals..

Spree was past his prime at that point..he was extremely inefficient and inconsistent, better off as a 6th man IMO..

Using that logic though, you could say the same thing for Josh Howard's "peak" in 2007..I wouldn't consider him a legit #2, same thing as Cassell, but a lot of Spurs fans here have used Howard as an argument when arguing for Dirk's previous supporting casts..


I don't think Garnett had a bad supporting cast in 2004, it was bad for a team with title hopes, but it wasn't bad overall..however, on the teams that missed the playoffs, I would definitely say they were bad..

[cobbler]

Kobe has the advantage of entering his prime during the Youtube/hype media of the NBA, where interviewers are always asking other players and coaches about him, always hyping him up..people on twitter write shit, and his fans use it as an argument..

In all my time as an NBA fan, I never even once remember an interviewer asking other players or coaches about the best player in the NBA while Shaq, Duncan and Garnett(for one season) were on top of the NBA, adding to the revisionist history that Kobe receives..

It's amazing how quickly everybody forgot about the dominance of these 3 guys, especially Shaq and Duncan, since they're both top 10 players..

Could possibly be the most stupid post ever written on ST. So Kobe is considered great because of the youtube/twitter generation overhypes him. :lmao Forget that the vast majority of basketball people (Owners, GM's, Coaches, Scouts, and Players) consider Kobe to be one of the best to ever lace them up. It's cleary not the case because Harlem hates him and twitter fans overrate him. Geeeeeeeeeez. That's beyond retarded.

In all your time as an NBA fan. :lmao:lmao:lmao

If you never heard an interviewer talk about Shaq's donminance and compare him with other greats (both past and present) and ask players whats it's like to play against the most dominant center ever, then I don't know what to say... other than you are not very observant. Talk about revisionist history.

[xellos88330]

I think this one is tough, but I would most likely go Garnett because he is a big.

Kobe brings better scoring talent, but that alone can get you only so far. It is really difficult for me to overlook the things Garnett did for the T'Wolves. IMO Garnett brings more to the table than Kobe does.

[JamStone]

Can anybody that thinks prime Kobe is a top 5 player of all-time make an argument for it?..Kobe is regarded as highly as he is due to his longevity IMO, his peak isn't really up here(in the top 5 range) IMO, I don't see how it would be..

So you're saying Pop and Duncan are just not very good at evaluating NBA talent?

[tdunk21]

i would prefer a dominant post player rather than a dominant jump shooter....better field goal percentage and shot blockin presence.....

[xellos88330]

So you're saying Pop and Duncan are just not very good at evaluating NBA talent?

I think they are great at evaluating talent, but I think the OP's question has been confused. I know that I am thinking of it in terms of who would you build a team around. I find it easier to build around a good big than a good guard.

If this question is based on individual talent, I have no answer.

Strength (by position) advantage Kobe
Length (By position) advantage Garnett
Shot blocking ability - Garnett
Rebounding - Garnett
Steals - Kobe
Scoring - Kobe
Defense - Garnett

[cobbler]

i would prefer a dominant post player rather than a dominant jump shooter....better field goal percentage and shot blockin presence.....

This is why comparing different positions is nonsense. Both have been great players and had remarkable years. Both have been the best player in the NBA at their respective positions. Kobe has maintained the higher level for a longer period. So when you ask... who is better... what exactly does that mean? Better skilled? Better fundementals? Better scorer? Most effecient? Better defender? Best to build around?

.... and as you said, in a situation where you are dealing with players fairly equal in talent, you go with the big to build around.

[HarlemHeat37]

So you're saying Pop and Duncan are just not very good at evaluating NBA talent?

How did you get that from me saying Kobe's prime isn't top 5 in the NBA's history?..

You brought up what Pop and Duncan said..IIRC, they said this in 2006 or 2007..I agreed that Kobe was better than Garnett at this time and arguably better than Duncan..Kobe had a great case for being the best player on the planet at the time..

How does that = a top 5 prime of all-time?..


Could possibly be the most stupid post ever written on ST. So Kobe is considered great because of the youtube/twitter generation overhypes him. :lmao Forget that the vast majority of basketball people (Owners, GM's, Coaches, Scouts, and Players) consider Kobe to be one of the best to ever lace them up. It's cleary not the case because Harlem hates him and twitter fans overrate him. Geeeeeeeeeez. That's beyond retarded.

In all your time as an NBA fan. :lmao:lmao:lmao

If you never heard an interviewer talk about Shaq's donminance and compare him with other greats (both past and present) and ask players whats it's like to play against the most dominant center ever, then I don't know what to say... other than you are not very observant. Talk about revisionist history.

Where did I say Kobe is only great because of the attention?..why do you do this?..when did I say Kobe isn't one of the best ever?..why do you always take a statement, use extreme hyperbole, and then pretend I said something else?..why are you such a Laker fan?..

I just re-read my post..I honestly have no idea how you got "Kobe isn't great and is only regarded as great due to the media" from what I said..

Why do you act like this?..

On your last point, it's not even debatable..the media coverage wasn't even close to today's NBA..in today's NBA, you have cameras in locker rooms asking other players about Kobe, you have segments where players/coaches are asked about Kobe, you have articles where old players are asked about Kobe..it wasn't even close in the past TBH, I don't know how you could say otherwise..

Why do you do this though?..

[mingus]

So you're saying Pop and Duncan are just not very good at evaluating NBA talent?

i don't agree w/ a lot of HH's points, but appealing to authority is just retarded, esp. when you consider the fact that Pop and Duncan are going to be facing Kobe in the future and don't need to give him extra motivation, and more importantly because Popovich simply has been wrong many times. case in point: earlier in the year he called RJ Stephen Jackson w/o all the baggage. are you kidding me...

Kobe has been surrounded by RIDICULOUS talent and one of the best coaches in the league, and they still had trouble with inferior teams like the Thunder and Jazz this year, and the Rockets last year. Kobe is a great player, but a prime a KG's team with the talent level of his cast and Phil Jackson and a coach would be dominating the league right now. they wouldn't even need a closer because the games would be over by the 3rd quarter.

[mingus]

imo, Garnett is right there with Duncan as one of the top players of all time. Duncan, as great as he is, has been SAVED by the same role players that KG lacked throughout his career in Minny. Horry and Manu won the Finals '05 series agains the Pistons.

[mingus]

KG has been a good second or third option for his career. Nothing he has done leads you to believe anything else. Kobe was player of the decade and the best of his generation. If you look at all the players that came in the league around his time, they have accomplished less, are no longer relevant, or retired.

Duncan=No longer relevant
TMAC=Retired
AI=Retired
KG=No longer relevant
Carter=heading towards retirement

Even after 14 long years, Kobe is still the best in this league.

i don't read your posts. sorry to dissapoint u.

[tdunk21]

i don't agree w/ a lot of HH's points, but appealing to authority is just retarded, esp. when you consider the fact that Pop and Duncan are going to be facing Kobe in the future and don't need to give him extra motivation, and more importantly because Popovich simply has been wrong many times. case in point: earlier in the year he called RJ Stephen Jackson w/o all the baggage. are you kidding me...

Kobe has been surrounded by RIDICULOUS talent and one of the best coaches in the league, and they still had trouble with inferior teams like the Thunder and Jazz this year, and the Rockets last year. Kobe is a great player, but a prime a KG's team with the talent level of his cast and Phil Jackson and a coach would be dominating the league right now. they wouldn't even need a closer because the games would be over by the 3rd quarter.

kobe would have been another reggie miller without shaq and gasol...that is for sure....

[mingus]

kobe would have been another reggie miller without shaq and gasol...that is for sure....

Kobe is waaaay better than Reggie, man.

as far as primes go it's:

1. Shaq

2. Duncan
3. Garnett
4. Kobe

people act like this is some kind of a diss to Bryant when it's not. all those players were unbelievable in their primes.

[tdunk21]

Kobe is waaaay better than Reggie, man.



i meant reggie was a good player without rings....kobe would have been just like that if not for shaq and gasol...

[TheMACHINE]

i meant reggie was a good player without rings....kobe would have been just like that if not for shaq and gasol...

:yawn

[ezau]

imo, Garnett is right there with Duncan as one of the top players of all time. Duncan, as great as he is, has been SAVED by the same role players that KG lacked throughout his career in Minny. Horry and Manu won the Finals '05 series agains the Pistons.

Just like all great players and teams, all of them needed great role players. And of, you're missing out on Bowen too. :toast

[ezau]

KG has been a good second or third option for his career. Nothing he has done leads you to believe anything else. Kobe was player of the decade and the best of his generation. If you look at all the players that came in the league around his time, they have accomplished less, are no longer relevant, or retired.

Duncan=No longer relevant
TMAC=Retired
AI=Retired
KG=No longer relevant
Carter=heading towards retirement

Even after 14 long years, Kobe is still the best in this league.

If not for the collusion of 2008, Kobe would have been on top of that list. Was Kobe relevant from 2005-2007?

[cobbler]

Where did I say Kobe is only great because of the attention?

I never implied that you said he is "only" great because of the attention. Where did you see that?

You said he is hyped up because of the attention from the new media sources and implied that Kobe is overhyped because fans use twitter msgs as resorces. Certainly you must have meant that the overhyping adds to his "greatness", no? Sorry, but that's just plain absurd.


..why do you do this??

Because you're an idiot who can't see past the stat sheet.


..when did I say Kobe isn't one of the best ever?..why do you always take a statement, use extreme hyperbole, and then pretend I said something else?

Seriously? You and your 2 alter egos probably compromise 90% of the Kobe hate on the forum. So the better question would be... if you honestly think Kobe is one of the best ever, why do you feel the need to post ad nauseum about how shitty a player and teammate he is? Get real. We all know your agenda. You are not fooling anyone.


..why are you such a Laker fan?

Born, raised, and live in So Cal. Attended first Laker game in 1965. Season ticket holder since 1971. Access to front office and team due to connections through own basketball career. Loyality. Pride in community. Etc Etc...

Why are you such a hater?


I just re-read my post..I honestly have no idea how you got "Kobe isn't great and is only regarded as great due to the media" from what I said..

Really? Wow, you cannot comprehend your own writing? How sad.


Kobe has the advantage of entering his prime during the Youtube/hype media of the NBA, where interviewers are always asking other players and coaches about him, always hyping him up..people on twitter write shit, and his fans use it as an argument..

In all my time as an NBA fan, I never even once remember an interviewer asking other players or coaches about the best player in the NBA while Shaq, Duncan and Garnett(for one season) were on top of the NBA, adding to the revisionist history that Kobe receives..

It's amazing how quickly everybody forgot about the dominance of these 3 guys, especially Shaq and Duncan, since they're both top 10 players.

Not seeing anything about basketball anywhere in your post. All I see is media and fan overhyping, revisionist history claims, and well, your hatred.


Why do you act like this?..

Because I have a special place in my heart for the disabled... and seeing as how yours is mental... I feel a special need to help you and set you straight on occasion.


On your last point, it's not even debatable..the media coverage wasn't even close to today's NBA..in today's NBA, you have cameras in locker rooms asking other players about Kobe, you have segments where players/coaches are asked about Kobe, you have articles where old players are asked about Kobe..it wasn't even close in the past TBH, I don't know how you could say otherwise..

I never once said the media coverage isn't deeper. Only a fool would argue that. Not sure where you got that from. You commented that you "NEVER ONCE" remember an interviewer asking other players or coaches about the best player in the NBA. I say you are a fool if you didn't because the media has always compared the greats be it in the newspaper, radio, mags, tv, or internet. Chamberlin & Russell was a huge debate and often players were asked their opinion. Magic vs Bird at number one was asked often. Shaq vs TD. Come on. You are honestly going to sit there and say you have never heard any media persons asking or talking about Shaq being the most dominant of all time? You are a liar if you answer yes to that, or simply the moron I consider you to be. Which is it?


Why do you do this though?..

Because I can and it bothers YOU! :blah

[TheMACHINE]

If not for the collusion of 2008, Kobe would have been on top of that list. Was Kobe relevant from 2005-2007?

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v309/Janthony019/sucka.jpg

[cobbler]

If not for the collusion of 2008, Kobe would have been on top of that list. Was Kobe relevant from 2005-2007?

2005-2007:

3 time all star
All NBA 3rd team - 2005
All NBA 1st team - 2006, 2007
All NBA Defense 1st team - 2006, 2007
All star MVP - 2007
81 point game
62 point 3 quarter game
4 consecutive 45+ point games
65 point game vs Blazers
10 50+ point games in a season
etc..


A whole lot of irrelevance there! :lmao

[Chucho]

Kobe. And it's not even close. But both are slightly over rated. No one gives Kobe's coach the credit he deserves and the fact that he has always needed an extremely talented big man to be successful. And Garnett would not have ever won a title without two other All Stars to defer to. He just doesn't have the "it" that a Kobe or Duncan, DWade or Shaq has. He has it more than a Dirk, Howard, Carter and McGrady, but he's kind of on the LBJ level.

[ezau]

2005-2007:

3 time all star
All NBA 3rd team - 2005
All NBA 1st team - 2006, 2007
All NBA Defense 1st team - 2006, 2007
All star MVP - 2007
81 point game
62 point 3 quarter game
4 consecutive 45+ point games
65 point game vs Blazers
10 50+ point games in a season
etc..


A whole lot of irrelevance there! :lmao

Missed the playoffs, you forgot putting it in your short list brah.

[DAF86]

:lol How is this a question? Prime Kobe without a doubt. He's one of the top three players of all time. How could Prime Garnett be better?

And on another note...I hate the argument that KG had no supporting cast in Minny as a defense for their playoff suckitude. He had Marbury for two years when Marbury averaged 18/9. He had Terrell Brandon for four years averaging around 16/8, etc.

lol not so closet Kobe fan

Seriously how is Kobe a top three player of all-time? He's number three of the decade, so unless you think the best three players in the history of the league came from this decade, there's no way to say that with a straight face.

[LnGrrrR]

Seriously how is Kobe a top three player of all-time? He's number three of the decade, so unless you think the best three players in the history of the league came from this decade, there's no way to say that with a straight face.

That's kinda what I was wondering. Shoot, I don't think he's even the greatest Laker of all time.

[cobbler]

Missed the playoffs, you forgot putting it in your short list brah.

You asked if he was relevant during 2005-2007. I showed he was. I don't see how missing the playoffs would go on a relevance list. Again, you asked, I showed you, and all you can come up with he didn't make the playoffs with Smush, Luke, and Kwame as starters and the coach quitting 1/3 the way into the season. BRILLIANT!!!!!

[Kori Ellis]

lol not so closet Kobe fan

Seriously how is Kobe a top three player of all-time? He's number three of the decade, so unless you think the best three players in the history of the league came from this decade, there's no way to say that with a straight face.

He's not # 3 of the decade to everyone - http://www.nba.com/alldecade/vote13/ ;)

Anyway... to me for All-Time, it's Michael and Wilt .. then a bunch of people could be argued for third... Russell/Magic/Oscar/Kobe/Shaq/blahblah

Most of the time, I think of Russell as third. And you could argue Kobe all the way down to 15 if you want. But I still don't see how prime KG is even close to as good as prime Kobe.

[BRHornet45]

But I still don't see how prime KG is even close to as good as prime Kobe.

come on Kori you're better than this

[TDMVPDPOY]

prime kobe or prime KG were just one man teams putting up monster stats....

[Veterinarian]

Well Sprewell went to 4 all-star games, Cassell only 1, which was during his time in Minny. They both got All-NBA honors at points in there career, Cassell again making it on the 2nd team with Minnesota.

I'd say that's a definite step above the Mo Williams/Josh Howard/Jason Terry/etc caliber of player.

The revisionist history that Garnett played with a bunch of nobodies in Minnesota is ridiculous.

He played with Cassell and Sprewell for a grand total of two years, that's two (2; dos; deux; ). The second year Cassell struggled and started only 38 games because of injury. The other year they got to the conference finals, before Cassell's back crapped out and he played a total of 64 minutes in 6 games against the Lakers. Still, in that teams two wins against the Lakers Cassell played a grand total of 1 minute. Then McHale traded Cassell for fucking Marko Jaric (no, seriously that's what KG's GM did plus McHale lost like 27 draft picks in a tampering case. Not that it would have made a difference the way he drafted--Ndubi Ebi, William Avery, Paul Grant, +drafting Ray Allen and trading him for career ball dominating loser Marbury, whose every team went from the lottery to like the best record in their conference the minute they got rid of him).

In conclusion, KG played with a bunch of nobodies for all but two years in Minnesota.

[ChrisRichards]

With this you have just have to evaluate if you really want value.
Prime Kobe was an offensive juggernaut, the best of his generation and second best of all time behind Jordan IMO, that being said you cant compare him to KG's prime because Garnett at the end of the day always brings a lot more to the table for his team, its unfair because post players in general always have more impact than perimeters. KG's not necessarily better than Kobe, but his game is always going to be far more valuable than any shooting guard not named Michael Jordan.


At the end of the day, who do you pick to win a championship? You cant go wrong with either, but if you want to win in a dominating and easier fashion, you pick KG.

[stretch]

Look man, staying in front of or with a guy is most definitely a skill. You need lateral quickness. Its analogous to playing cornerback in the NFL. Are you going to say Darell Revis isn't skilled? And that all he has to is run hard and follow people around? Shit most corners run hard but can't stay with wide receivers and tons of sfs play hard on defense and they aren't Scottie Pippen.

Lateral quickness is not a skill, its athleticism.

Now if you are talking footwork, that's a different story. Good footwork can definitely be considered a skill. Too bad KG never utilized that footwork to develop some more offensive moves.

[21_Blessings]

Too bad Dirk never utilized is his heart and put some effort forth on defense.

:lmao Dirk's post game :lmao

Speaking of never properly developing something.

[HarlemHeat37]

I never implied that you said he is "only" great because of the attention. Where did you see that?

You said he is hyped up because of the attention from the new media sources and implied that Kobe is overhyped because fans use twitter msgs as resorces. Certainly you must have meant that the overhyping adds to his "greatness", no? Sorry, but that's just plain absurd.

I said he has an advantage because of this, which isn't arguable..


Because you're an idiot who can't see past the stat sheet.

I don't only use stats for my arguments..I just don't like using unquantifiable attributes like "killer instinct" because it's fucking stupid..it's a reach that people use when they don't have an argument IMO..


Seriously? You and your 2 alter egos probably compromise 90% of the Kobe hate on the forum. So the better question would be... if you honestly think Kobe is one of the best ever, why do you feel the need to post ad nauseum about how shitty a player and teammate he is? Get real. We all know your agenda. You are not fooling anyone.

The majority of my posts that involve Kobe are in reply to Laker fans, TBH..I'm an admitted hater, but I always give Kobe his credit..unfortunately, it's not enough for Laker fans, they always need more compliments..



Born, raised, and live in So Cal. Attended first Laker game in 1965. Season ticket holder since 1971. Access to front office and team due to connections through own basketball career. Loyality. Pride in community. Etc Etc...

Why are you such a hater?

I'm really weird, TBH..I don't like rapists/snitches/guys that shit on their teammates and organization/guys that make excuses for all of their failures/wife-beaters/racists/animal abusers..

I should get that checked out, uh?..



Not seeing anything about basketball anywhere in your post. All I see is media and fan overhyping, revisionist history claims, and well, your hatred.

Way to ignore all my posts in this thread and just focus on the 1 post where I talk about Kobe's advantage through the media, which is obviously true..


Because I can and it bothers YOU! :blah

It doesn't bother me..other than namlook and koriwhat, you're probably the most trollable person on SpursTalk..it's not just me saying this, others have noticed and commented about it as well..

You're also a proven racist(which is evident when you've said Gasol had the right to take that racist picture + the fact that you made a racist statement yesterday towards Hispanics), a guy that jokes about rape, and a guy that fabricates false statements in an attempt to make others look bad..