Reply With Quote
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.
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.at stretch. If I had never seen KG play I would think he was Horace Grant 2.0 based on his posts in this thread.
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.
As an atheist I don't know why I sometimes use that phrase.
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 le, yet Nowitzki was better that year?..
I remember now that I read it before but it's true that I didn't remember about Manu beign on it.
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.
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..
+/- is bull . anyone who knows basketball knows that.
If were gonna start talking advanced states....
and yes, DAF, you can use the same homepage joke.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.
percentages?
also, Pierce + Allen = 27. A true number one option should not be deferring more than half the time on big shots.
Adjusted +/- isn't bull , 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..
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..
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 ty team to the Playoffs because he has actually some leading skills and his explosiveness is just amazing.
Long story short, Kobe prime >>> Garnett
The answer is obviously Kobe. No point in even discussing it.
Although, Prime KG > Prime Dirk
Only people I ever heard say different were mav homers.
I'm guessing you didn't read that Bill Simmons article.
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 les this would matter much less.
Turd in your punch bowl: defense. Bet you never mention it.
and the quote I posted
Shouldn't you be packing your bags for Cleveland?and the quote I posted
if you have a 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 player. case in point: Michael Finley had a better +/- than T-Mac, Shaq, and Kobe back in 2003.
good comeback
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
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..
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.
You are an idiot. Do you even realize what you just said?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
ok bud