Is the Duncan/Garnett debate finally settled?

[DJB]

What? Not sure what you mean. You think those Wolves teams had any kind of talent? Most of them were absolutely awful.

That's a load of horse . Timmy could have won a le with Sprewell and Cassell. Piece of cake. I hate it when people play the "Garnett never had Manu and Tony" card. that. Sprewell and Cassell had just as much talent in their time while playing with KG as Tony and Manu had in 2003/2005.

GTFO

[Killakobe81]

Btw, it's amazing how Spurs fans are so extremely insecure about Duncan and always worried about being underrated or better than this or that. That's one thing fans from other teams are always saying in the NBA forum and I have to reckon they're absolutely right. Not sure if it's amusing or sad. And honestly, the idea that basketball leaders must be stand up guys who their teammates really like (and that's actually the case with KG - his insane work ethic and smarts/hard working/talkative nature on the court make him that kind of leader) is truly bizarre. Bird and McHale hated each other off the court, Bird would never rebound the ball for anyone, he'd even threaten role-players if they scored lots of points and steal the spot-light from him. Jordan was even worse, he had the habit of mentally torturing his teammates. The fact that Spurs fans resort so often to so much nonsense talk when they're discussing Duncan, the stupid "winner" argument - like if Duncan would have been a worse player if he had spend his entire career surrounded by the Wallys and Trenton Hassells of the world or going on going on against Jordan and Pippen then in that scenario he'd be a lesser player and not deserve the same amount of respect - saddens me.

Dont normally agree with this guy (mojogrove above) ...but he brings a great point about Spur fans and haters in general ...

When you (haters) don't like a player: Kobe, kG, etc. Resort to talking about what "kind" of guy the player is or teammate they are ...

I remember Bird not getting along with Mchale, Magic not getting along with Kareem Jordan sucker punching Kerr and MENTALLY DESTROYING Stacy King...not to mention Kobe vs. Shaq

But what did they all have in common? les. Lot's of 'em. Many great players are pricks. Spurs have a bunch of good guys and that is GREAT ESPECIALLY in a small market like SA.

BUT being an A$$hole: Kobe, KG, Kareem and Bird ...doesnt detract at ALL from your greatness.

Problem is many on NBA fanforums ignore the bag behavior of guys they like: Bowen (in SA), Jordan pretty much everywhere, Lebron's dancing, and Cp3's tantrums

BUT crucify: KG, Kobe, McHale the Bad boys etc which is bull .

[DPG21920]

dude i took a psychology class in college, youre insecure, you may need to talk to someone about your issues

See, this guy knows. We could be posting with the next grey Hannibal Lector.

[Killakobe81]

And Duncan is great but really a center ...I know sensitive subject here but come on!

THE NBA is full of this crap (Not just Spurs) just like Amare is NOT a center ...

I just say Duncan is the third greatest post PLAYER I have ever seen ...JUST behind Hakeem a notch below Kareem and above Shaq ...

[Killakobe81]

When you take les, leadership etc in to play ...Duncan is greater than both Shaq and Hakeem ...

[TampaDude]

Duncan >>>>> Garnett

/thread

[mogrovejo]

That's a load of horse . Timmy could have won a le with Sprewell and Cassell. Piece of cake. I hate it when people play the "Garnett never had Manu and Tony" card. that. Sprewell and Cassell had just as much talent in their time while playing with KG as Tony and Manu had in 2003/2005.

GTFO

You're aware Cassell was injured, right? You're aware that Olowkandi was their starting center, 33 years old Derrick Martin their starting PG, Hoiberg in his last NBA season was logging +30 mpg and guys like Mark Madsen were important part of the rotation, right? And that we're not exactly talking about prime Sprewell here.

[DPG21920]

Wow, this guy has some serious issues. He simply cannot let this go. Also, he tries to play the "holier than thou" card, while he himself uses ad hominem arguments. This is scary.

Geez, all this obsession because you're owned in an internet-based basketball discussion? Well, two or three discussions? That's not healthy, boy.

Your posts in this thread are all excellent contributions for a basketball discussion.

[mogrovejo]

Geez, I found myself an internet stalker.

[DPG21920]

Geez, I found myself an internet stalker.

Another ad hominem argument. Boston fans are classy and add so much to the basketball discussion. Raise the bar Hannibal.

[mogrovejo]

Hmm... I think the Spurs wouldn't have won the 2003 ring. They would have won the others.

Duncan would have never won a ring in Minny. People forget Cassell got injured, that Sprewell wasn't playing defense anymore and how absolutely awful was that supporting cast. I mean, most of the guys in the rotation were out of the league 2 seasons later.

Not sure if Boston would have won in 2008 with Duncan instead of Garnett. It'd change the defensive quality of the team quite a bit. Never thought about this, need some more time.

I think they'd still win, although I'm not sure. 75-25 they would. The big man rotation would be a lot less versatile and slower - I think the D would still be elite but not as good. The offense.. Rondo+Perkins+Duncan together would create serious spacing problems. I think Posey would get a lot more minutes and Perkins+Powe+PJ less. Anyway, eventually would still be enough to win the le.

[DJB]

You're aware Cassell was injured, right? You're aware that Olowkandi was their starting center, 33 years old Derrick Martin their starting PG, Hoiberg in his last NBA season was logging +30 mpg and guys like Mark Madsen were important part of the rotation, right? And that we're not exactly talking about prime Sprewell here.

Cassell averaged 19.8ppg when he played w/ KG and was injured for half of one season. Our starting center in 2007 was Fabricio Oberto. Avery Johnson was 34 when we won in 1999. Danny Ferry was an important part of our rotation in 1999. Latrell Sprewell was prime enough to average 17ppg when playing w/ KG.


Any more brain busters?

Once again: GTFO

[samikeyp]

You clearly have serious troubles with reading comprehension.

I thought it was pretty clear it was not a serious post...apparently not. Sorry my post was written in a way that made you take it literally.




(again...having fun)

[m33p0]

if duncan was in minny, they would have been able to sign/draft better players, the joe smith incident wouldn't have happened.

and... can you honestly see garnett take that 3 in the '08 suns series? more likely, he would have passed it to someone else.

[MosesGuthrie]

I wasn't talking about all Spurs fans.


I wasn't dismissing everyone here. Sorry if my generalization about "Spurs fans" was written in a way that made you take it literally.

It was probably the way you referred to "Spurs fans". By this you gave the indication (albeit not true) that you were lumping all fans together.

[MosesGuthrie]

I thought it was pretty clear it was not a serious post...apparently not.

I thought it was pretty clear with the but then again, I have seen your posting style here before so I kind of knew it.

[ABrooks111]

I'm no KG hater, but he never has been, and never will be able to hold Duncan's jock.

It's science.

[NFGIII]

I would say after seeing Garnett get ejected just several minutes ago that Tim definitely has the mental edge on this dip . What an idiot he could also possibly get suspended for what he just did. You would never see Duncan do what KG just did espescially in a playoff game.

That is one reason that I believe TD was superior to KG even though I believe that KG was the better athlete. Imagine if KG had played down low more, thereby expanding his game, while playing under control?

Unlike many people here, I've absolutely loved Kevin Garnett throughout his Hall-of-Fame career. Garnett is (IMO) the most versatile forward, other than Lebron James or Larry Bird, to ever play in the NBA. But, the notion that he's ever really been Duncan's equal throughout the entirety of their careers is ridiculous. They've been equals, throughout parts of their careers, but Duncan has always had the upperhand with his ability to score and defend in the low-post.

Agreed. I really don't think anyone could agrue that KG wasn't a dominant player in the NBA. I think that TD and KG had similar yet slightly different skill sets which made them different players. TD always had, prior to KG in Boston, a better team around him. Coaches, too.

There should be a debate, as there's no reason why KG couldn't have had a similar impact, but his insecurity and assness wouldn't allow it.

Instead he shied away from being called 7' because that would mean he'd have to take his ass to the paint and take the punishment; settling for jumpers and not paying the price to best help his team was the easy way out.

Plus, his constant insecurity and need to not be viewed as soft had him concoct a fugazi image that grated on his teammates and eventually brought resentment; being comfortable in your own skin and conducting yourself in the right way, as a teammate and professional, tends to net better results. (see: Duncan, Tim)

IOW, the debate never had much merit.

That is one of the main reasons that I think TD will better considered the better player overall. He played a traditional 4/5 and banged in the paint over his career. KG shied away from that type of contact and played away from the rim more so.

Once again a demonstration of the mental toughness that TD displayed constantly which KG showed only occasionally. IIRC Jack Nicklaus stated that in pro golf all the players had pretty much had the same skills. It was those players that displayed the mental toughness and discipline that usually won the tournaments. And those cons uted roughy 10% of the Tour.

I've always liked KG game myself. Though I will never be a fan of smack talk and that emotional style of play he needs to given credit for what he has done on the court. He gets into the HOF on the first ballot. Frankly there is no debate on that issue. IHMO

And Duncan is great but really a center ...I know sensitive subject here but come on!

THE NBA is full of this crap (Not just Spurs) just like Amare is NOT a center ...

I just say Duncan is the third greatest post PLAYER I have ever seen ...JUST behind Hakeem a notch below Kareem and above Shaq ...

Agreed to a certain point. After Drob's retirement TD starting playing the 5 alot more. But not until the departure of Rasho and Nazr did he play the 5 more so than the 4.

[Blackjack]

You clearly have serious troubles with reading comprehension.

Oh, the irony . . .

I don't care for that cheap high-school psychology that fills most of your post so I'll pass on it. To me that's all nonsense that depends on fuzzy perceptions and preconceptions about the players. You can't present a single indication that Garnett isn't an excellent locker-room presence and leader so you resort to that kind of weird stuff like "he was worried with his image". You remind me of the guys who say Duncan wants to be listed as a PF even though he's a center because he's insecure about his place in history, All-NBA teams and stuff like that.

Great take. We shouldn't listen to how players and teammates talk about and act around someone; put any stock into the validity of Marbury's issues because he was a malcontent (issues that many had but were either more mature, more professional or not talented enough to say much about); or put any stock into how a guy has a significant change in approach and demeanor after constant criticism for coming up short and coming off as soft.

You've obviously not followed KG all that closely until he landed on your team, so I'll excuse the overemotional, dismissive take of your boy; maybe that insecurity thing plagues you too?

Those Wolves teams were generally pretty good offensively, although not elite, but you're confusing scoring per game with offensive quality and offensive talent with overall talent. The only talented team they had was the one that made the ECF and they just got too injured to advance further - and even that team had an horrible supporting cast, much weaker than anything the Spurs had in the last 10 years.

Outside of Duncan and Robinson (the former supposedly an equal, for some, to KG and the latter post-injuries and dominant status), I'd like to hear all the All-Stars or All-Star-snubbed players Duncan played with from the time he entered the league until '05; that 'only talented team' KG had went to the WCF, by the way; which you would have known had you really followed him before he came to your team.

The Spurs had always more talented and it wasn't even close. In the early 2000s the best player for the Wolves was Wally Szczerbiak. Before him, Terrel Brandon. Are we really comparing them to the Spurs 2nd best playerd in the Duncan era?

KG isn't Durant. To me writing this "is there a reason someone like Kevin Durant and his slight frame can dominate the free throw line like he's been and KG couldn't find similar success? I don't think so" shows either a deep lack of understanding of the game of basketball or that you're just allowing your passions to cloud your judgement. Unless you believe there's no reason why Durant can't pass or rebound as Garnett, or score as efficiently as Garnett.

Yup, that definitely be some irony . . .

I'm quite comfortable with my understanding of the game and I'll let my words on this board stand for themselves. The point, which, again, you failed to comprehend or lack the understanding to acknowledge, had nothing to do with a comparison of skill set or the type of player they are: it's about the willingness to pay the price (physically and mentally) and the fact that a slighter frame is no excuse.

KG wasn't more phisically gifted than Duncan, IMO. He had and has different physical traits: he's more agile and quicker, absolutely.

He's taller, longer, more athletic and has more ball skills. He's not more physically gifted?

If you want to make an argument that his gifts had him less effective because it made him more of a Swiss Army Knife than a full-out assault weapon or brute-force object, fine. But to say he didn't hit the genetic lottery or that he wasn't more gifted than Duncan physically is comical; KG's one of the most impressive and freakish athletes this game has ever seen.

To me, if there's one thing that Garnett did in a level that noone else did in history was defending the pick'n'roll - and his combination of length, mobility and awareness certainly helped. Duncan is way stronger, he's a much better post defender than KG could have ever been. They had different games.

Other than me not being familiar with that dude 'noone', I agree. (He sure seems to come up a lot on this board.)

Duncan has been a center for most of his career; KG a face-up forward.

Really? Did his career start around '06? Maybe you'd like to claim Robinson as a power forward since he was more of a face-up player and less skilled in the post than KG?

You're overestamating KG's athletic skill-set when compared to Duncan; you're grossly underestimating the importance of body strength and different body types. See what happened to Jermaine O'Neal's career after he and the Pacers decided they wanted him more on the blocks for a good cautionary tale.

I - Run - E . . .

More than one way to skin a cat, brah. Again, it's about paying the price and utilizing one's skills in a way that gives a team the best chance to win. In my view, which is one that's watched him from pretty much the time he entered the league, he failed to do so.

I don't really care much for Garnett or Duncan, the last player I was kind of a fan of was Dee Brown I think. I believe most of this discussions are permeated with too much emotion. I have no idea how the fact that you're a Spurs fan in a Spurs board changes who the players are.

You sure seem pretty emotionally invested in KG; bumping insignificant threads and defending his honor on every end of this board . . .

See, I've been posting here for over 2 years now ... and, in case you haven't noticed, I'm not throwing tantrums about my favorite players on a daily, or even weekly basis, or hanging out in the NBA forum defending their honor; I don't have a problem with those who do, regardless of team or player, but I'm not one you can successfully paint with that brush . . .

As to the fact that I'm a Spurs fan posting on a Spurs board, it could easily be viewed as if I don't give a fair shake when it comes to comparisons or debates, as it pertains to the Spurs (a rooting interest), so that's what I was alluding to; I may dislike certain players, but I respect game and don't waste much time, if any, degrading or dismissing the abilities of players I'm none-too-fond of.

[QUOTE]

Btw, it's amazing how Spurs fans are so extremely insecure about Duncan and always worried about being underrated or better than this or that. That's one thing fans from other teams are always saying in the NBA forum and I have to reckon they're absolutely right. Not sure if it's amusing or sad.

Eye runny . . .

You're pretty good with that brush. Misguided and devoid of facts, as it pertains to this poster, but good nonetheless.

And honestly, the idea that basketball leaders must be stand up guys who their teammates really like (and that's actually the case with KG - his insane work ethic and smarts/hard working/talkative nature on the court make him that kind of leader) is truly bizarre.Bird and McHale hated each other off the court, Bird would never rebound the ball for anyone, he'd even threaten role-players if they scored lots of points and steal the spot-light from him. Jordan was even worse, he had the habit of mentally torturing his teammates. The fact that Spurs fans resort so often to so much nonsense talk when they're discussing Duncan, the stupid "winner" argument

They don't have to be choir boys, pillars of the community or even liked ... but they have to be respected and capable of instilling fear; the latter can come from the thought of reprisal or the idea of letting one down. (IOW, you can be an ass or exude class, but you can't be absent when the greatest of responsibility's passed; disappearing acts and allowing blame to be put on your teammates, being a prime example -- Johnny Cochran ain't got on this dude!)

- like if Duncan would have been a worse player if he had spend his entire career surrounded by the Wallys and Trenton Hassells of the world or going on going on against Jordan and Pippen then in that scenario he'd be a lesser player and not deserve the same amount of respect - saddens me.

The education system saddens me; and I thought I should've went to college . . .

Ira Knee.

[mogrovejo]

Cassell averaged 19.8ppg when he played w/ KG and was injured for half of one season. Our starting center in 2007 was Fabricio Oberto. Avery Johnson was 34 when we won in 1999. Danny Ferry was an important part of our rotation in 1999. Latrell Sprewell was prime enough to average 17ppg when playing w/ KG.


Any more brain busters?

Once again: GTFO

Dude, they made the Conference Finals and than Cassell got injured. That team was Garnett, a old Sprewell and a bunch of D-Leaguers. Madsen was one of their best players. They still took the Lakers to 6 games, the same Lakers that had eliminated Duncan's Spurs in the previous round. What's so difficult to understand about this?

It's this radicalism that makes some Spurs fans look bad.

That is one reason that I believe TD was superior to KG even though I believe that KG was the better athlete. Imagine if KG had played down low more, thereby expanding his game, while playing under control?

Agreed. I really don't think anyone could agrue that KG wasn't a dominant player in the NBA. I think that TD and KG had similar yet slightly different skill sets which made them different players. TD always had, prior to KG in Boston, a better team around him. Coaches, too.

That is one of the main reasons that I think TD will better considered the better player overall. He played a traditional 4/5 and banged in the paint over his career. KG shied away from that type of contact and played away from the rim more so.

Once again a demonstration of the mental toughness that TD displayed constantly which KG showed only occasionally. IIRC Jack Nicklaus stated that in pro golf all the players had pretty much had the same skills. It was those players that displayed the mental toughness and discipline that usually won the tournaments. And those cons uted roughy 10% of the Tour.

I've always liked KG game myself. Though I will never be a fan of smack talk and that emotional style of play he needs to given credit for what he has done on the court. He gets into the HOF on the first ballot. Frankly there is no debate on that issue. IHMO

Agreed to a certain point. After Drob's retirement TD starting playing the 5 alot more. But not until the departure of Rasho and Nazr did he play the 5 more so than the 4.

Is the reason why Duncan was never as good as Garnett defending the pick'n'roll, taking people off the bounce and closing out on shooters mental? Was Duncan too soft to do all those things at the same level of Garnett?

if duncan was in minny, they would have been able to sign/draft better players, the joe smith incident wouldn't have happened..

LOL. Why?

[mogrovejo]

Oh, the irony . . .

reat take. We shouldn't listen to how players and teammates talk about and act around someone; put any stock into the validity of Marbury's issues because he was a malcontent (issues that many had but were either more mature, more professional or not talented enough to say much about); or put any stock into how a guy has a significant change in approach and demeanor after constant criticism for coming up short and coming off as soft.

You've obviously not followed KG all that closely until he landed on your team, so I'll excuse the overemotional, dismissive take of your boy; maybe that insecurity thing plagues you too?



Outside of Duncan and Robinson (the former supposedly an equal, for some, to KG and the latter post-injuries and dominant status), I'd like to hear all the All-Stars or All-Star-snubbed players Duncan played with from the time he entered the league until '05; that 'only talented team' KG had went to the WCF, by the way; which you would have known had you really followed him before he came to your team.



Yup, that definitely be some irony . . .

I'm quite comfortable with my understanding of the game and I'll let my words on this board stand for themselves. The point, which, again, you failed to comprehend or lack the understanding to acknowledge, had nothing to do with a comparison of skill set or the type of player they are: it's about the willingness to pay the price (physically and mentally) and the fact that a slighter frame is no excuse.



He's taller, longer, more athletic and has more ball skills. He's not more physically gifted?

If you want to make an argument that his gifts had him less effective because it made him more of a Swiss Army Knife than a full-out assault weapon or brute-force object, fine. But to say he didn't hit the genetic lottery or that he wasn't more gifted than Duncan physically is comical; KG's one of the most impressive and freakish athletes this game has ever seen.



Other than me not being familiar with that dude 'noone', I agree. (He sure seems to come up a lot on this board.)



Really? Did his career start around '06? Maybe you'd like to claim Robinson as a power forward since he was more of a face-up player and less skilled in the post than KG?



I - Run - E . . .

More than one way to skin a cat, brah. Again, it's about paying the price and utilizing one's skills in a way that gives a team the best chance to win. In my view, which is one that's watched him from pretty much the time he entered the league, he failed to do so.



You sure seem pretty emotionally invested in KG; bumping insignificant threads and defending his honor on every end of this board . . .

See, I've been posting here for over 2 years now ... and, in case you haven't noticed, I'm not throwing tantrums about my favorite players on a daily, or even weekly basis, or hanging out in the NBA forum defending their honor; I don't have a problem with those who do, regardless of team or player, but I'm not one you can successfully paint with that brush . . .

As to the fact that I'm a Spurs fan posting on a Spurs board, it could easily be viewed as if I don't give a fair shake when it comes to comparisons or debates, as it pertains to the Spurs (a rooting interest), so that's what I was alluding to; I may dislike certain players, but I respect game and don't waste much time, if any, degrading or dismissing the abilities of players I'm none-too-fond of.

Eye runny . . .

You're pretty good with that brush. Misguided and devoid of facts, as it pertains to this poster, but good nonetheless.




They don't have to be choir boys, pillars of the community or even liked ... but they have to be respected and capable of instilling fear; the latter can come from the thought of reprisal or the idea of letting one down. (IOW, you can be an ass or exude class, but you can't be absent when the greatest of responsibility's passed; disappearing acts and allowing blame to be put on your teammates, being a prime example -- Johnny Cochran ain't got on this dude!)



The education system saddens me; and I thought I should've went to college . . .

Ira Knee.

I'm sorry for the orthographic mistakes, English isn't my first language.

I don't have time to answer point by point, especially to the childish personal remarks, but I'll sum it up:

- your understanding of athleticism is wrong. Duncan was a very athletic player.

- saying that a slighter frame is no excuse to play in the post is just bizarre. Lower body strength is essential to play the post effectively. I can elaborate on this if you want. Garnett was never a low post player; like Durant is not the playmaker Garnett is; or Duncan doesn't have their ability to hit long jumpers. To explain this from a soft/tough perspective is just crazy.

- I still can't understand why the fact that you being a Spurs fan affects the way you view the players. My opinion about a player doesn't change a bit depending on the team he's playing for.

[Blackjack]

Well, let me preface this by saying: I meant what I said in the other thread about having another quality poster contributing here. There's plenty we have agreement on, as it pertains to scouting and physical attributes, and how they translate to the game (plenty of which have been made clear to me in the actual meat of your posts), and it was never my intention to personally attack; I'm a smartass by nature and some of your remarks came off as condescending and/or disingenuous.

Having said that, if that's the take you took from my post ... we've reached an impasse. Maybe it's the language barrier you've just brought to my attention, or maybe I'm just not intelligent enough to present my argument in a comprehensible fashion.

As to the three points:

- No, no it's not . . .

- There's more than one way to skin a cat means: the same effectiveness can come in myriad forms.

- My being a Spurs fan has nothing to do with the way I view other players. But my being a Spurs fan seemed to contribute to your response. It's pretty commonplace when it comes to these debates, so I pointed out that that commonly perceived notion wasn't in play with myself.

Bottom line:

Duncan > Garnett (as has always been the case); that is how this started, eh?

[NFGIII]

Is the reason why Duncan was never as good as Garnett defending the pick'n'roll, taking people off the bounce and closing out on shooters mental? Was Duncan too soft to do all those things at the same level of Garnett?

No, physical. KG was a better athlete and quicker. He had the attributes to do what you said he could, TD wasn't as gifted but has learned to max out what talent he has, which is considerable. KG jsut wasn't as mentally strong as TD. IF you're 7' you need to get into the paint and bang. And that goes for Dirk, too. You can't teach height so anyone gifted to be 7' and not willing to go into the paint on a regular basis presents a problem for me. As a coach I would be in their face about that.

Just imagine TD's personality in KG's body. What a monster that would be.

[mogrovejo]

No, physical. KG was a better athlete and quicker. He had the attributes to do what you said he could, TD wasn't as gifted but has learned to max out what talent he has, which is considerable. KG jsut wasn't as mentally strong as TD. IF you're 7' you need to get into the paint and bang. And that goes for Dirk, too. You can't teach height so anyone gifted to be 7' and not willing to go into the paint on a regular basis presents a problem for me. As a coach I would be in their face about that.

The reason why Garnett doesn't play the low post game is because he doesn't have the physical traits to do it. How can you bang if you don't have the lower body strength to hold position?

Find me another player with Garnett body type who's a low post scorer, a bruiser and a banger. You can't? Conclusion: they're all soft mentally!

Can't people understand how bizarre this reasoning is?

Geez, there's Jermaine O'Neal example, for Pete's sake! It's not like this is exactly a speculative issue. As a coach, you'd be a danger for your players with that mindset.

Just imagine TD's personality in KG's body. What a monster that would be.

I don't know if it'd be a monster of not. I know it wouldn't be a banger in the paint though.

[mogrovejo]

And Garnett never had a problem being physical in the paint - that's why he was the best rebounder in the league and one of the best rebounders in the history of the game. If this doesn't disprove the "mentally soft" theory I don't know what to say.

Hold position in the blocks? That's an entirely different issue. He has pretty good technique, gets excellent leverage, gets wide and low, for a player of his type he's actually pretty good... but the strength just isn't there to be a dominant banger.