Duncan vs KG debate from a neutral fan base

[lebomb]

You guys have a good one......nice debate.

[Reggie Miller]

KG wants to win as much as any player in the league. And, the only thing that ever was a constraint on that desire to win was his loyalty to the city of Minneapolis and the Timberwolves franchise. People make so much about the greed of a modern day pro athlete, well, KG shows loyalty and he's still criticized for it...

Just because a player doesn't win championships, it doesn't mean he doesn't have the desire to win championships. That's a ridiculous statement. It's a team game...

I don't believe for a minute that Kevin Garnett is NOT about winning championships. I don't believe for a minute he's only concerned about money...

In the final analysis, I think virtually every player in the NBA wants to win more than anything. Sure, there are exceptions, just like in any advocation. I know we can all name several players (perhaps even dozens of players) that did not have the desire to win or work ethic to make it in the league. However, these guys are the exceptions.

Even the guys that are more or less coasting on natural talent or size had to work pretty hard at some point to make it. (I'm not sure when, or for how long, but they put some time in on the court at some point.)

What I do believe is that the vast majority of these guys do not understand what it takes to win at the professional level. This is compounded by the fact that most NBA players are used to winning and dominating. They are used to being the big fishes in small ponds. When they are cast into the ocean (NBA), it's truly a sink or swim situation, with little or no real support or instruction from the crummier organizations.

Another problem is the power and sense of en lement that many players have today. No one is forcing them to go beyond their comfort zone. No one close to them is questioning their commitment to winning (and the people who do criticize are often dismissed as "losers" for voicing this opinion on the internet, talk radio, etc.). It is much easier to get rid of an entire front office than to overhaul a roster, and everyone knows it.

I guess the best analogy is the old saying, "Everyone wants to go to Heaven, but no one wants to die." Every player in the NBA wants to win (sure beats the out of losing, right?), but few have the commitment and structure to realize their true potential. To me, KG is in this last category. How much of the blame he needs to shoulder personally is something we will never know. I do know that no one is ever completely innocent in these matters, becuase ultimately, every player in the league is responsible for his actions or inaction.

All that said, I have never thought of Garnett as a "bad" guy, just a guy who would win more games if he played his position properly.

[JamStone]

Its not like the Wolves didnt try to place talent around Garnett......nothing happened with it. Like you said......you had Marbury and Billups (whom won with Detroit)......I dont know........I just dont think Garnett is as basketball smart as Timmy D. Tim does the right thing at the right time (especially in the playoffs) .....this is where Ive always seen Garnetts weakness and him faultering. Just because he avg. 26pts and 18 boards doesnt mean he made good decisions during the game. Maybe he didnt share the ball enough??? Tims numbers are alot lower than other many times, because he sees the court and gets people the ball......did/does Garnett do that???

Marbury was a 19-20 year old egomaniac. You can't even begin to compare him as a similar talent to what Tim Duncan had in David Robinson. Robinson was an established superstar who was also humble enough to let Tim Duncan be the star of the team. Starbury wanted to be the star of a team. Billups was the back-up point guard for the Wolves when he played with KG. And, he was treated like the back-up as well. It's a complete joke to even start to compare Marbury and Billups when he played with Minnesota with the likes of David Robinson, and even guys like Avery Johnson and Sean Elliot, who were established veterans who understood what it took to win and were willing to be team players. Marbury was an egomaniac who wanted to be the best player on the planet. Billups was a journey man point guard who played for five teams in five seasons and was fighting for his next contract. How can you even begin to say that is putting the type of talent around KG that would be condusive to championship success?

As for sharing the ball enough, check assists totals. If anything, KG has been criticizing for sharing the ball too much. And, I'd say it's a lot easier to share the ball when you trust your teammates as opposed to not knowing if your teammates are going to come through. Duncan has always been on teams where the team dynamics had a lot of trust. That's one of the great things about how Popovich coaches. Same can't be said for how Flip Saunders coaches those Timberwolves teams in the early 2000s. And, right there again is an example of an independent factor helped Tim Duncan be as great as he's been, coaching.

[Spurminator]

What it boils down to for me is that Kevin Garnett has missed the Playoffs three straight years, and it hasn't been close. I can't fathom Tim Duncan EVER missing the Playoffs, much less missing 3 years in a row.

Something to keep in mind when comparing Duncan's supporting casts to KG's is that it's not a simple discussion of who had the better cast. We're talking about teams that WON THE CHAMPIONSHIP vs. a team that (most of the time) didn't make it past Round One. So even if Duncan's supporting cast was better, was it that much better?

Talentwise, I believe they are about equal. I think Duncan's talents are more relevant for his position, but they both are capable from a strictly talent standpoint of leading a Championship team. Where KG is lacking is his ability to inspire teammates. Players love playing with Duncan. Players take pay cuts to join or stay with the Spurs, and a big part of that is Duncan.

Players pay lip service to Garnett, but there are clear problems with his leadership. Not every instance was his fault, but there has been a pattern.

- Marbury left to get out of KG's shadow
- Wally never got along with KG
- Spreewell was unwilling to return to the Wolves unless they gave him an insane amount of money
- He punched a rookie in practice
- Randy Wittman publically questioned KG's leadership this past season.

This, IMO, is the biggest difference between Duncan and KG.

The rings vs. no rings argument is often a weak one, but here it's not just a matter of 4 vs. none. It's 4 vs. not even CLOSE. In my Spurs homer mind, this argument was settled in 2003... and it's only gotten more conclusive since then.

I know it's a long shot but I'm kind of hoping Boston misses the Playoffs this year. I think that would be a pretty definitive answer for everyone.

[lebomb]

..........came back for one quick read........and one final comment. Remember basically all the Spurs championship teams have been completely different......not close to the same cast of stars.....except for the main 3 for the last 3 ships. The Spurs have won with placing totally new individuals around Tim for the last 10yrs. That says one of alot about coaching....but a one uva, uva lot about Tim D.

[Reggie Miller]

I know it's a long shot but I'm kind of hoping Boston misses the Playoffs this year. I think that would be a pretty definitive answer for everyone.

Even then, you would have people saying, "Sure he has Pierce and Allen, but who else? Their team has no depth..."

People who like a player will always make excuses. I finally wised up when I realized that two of my favorite players (Miller and Barkley) never won a le because they were not team leaders defensively. , Barkely even admits it.

[JamStone]

What it boils down to for me is that Kevin Garnett has missed the Playoffs three straight years, and it hasn't been close. I can't fathom Tim Duncan EVER missing the Playoffs, much less missing 3 years in a row.

I can't imagine Kevin Garnett ever missing the playoffs playing for RC Buford or Gregg Popovich.

Something to keep in mind when comparing Duncan's supporting casts to KG's is that it's not a simple discussion of who had the better cast. We're talking about teams that WON THE CHAMPIONSHIP vs. a team that (most of the time) didn't make it past Round One. So even if Duncan's supporting cast was better, was it that much better?

It's a fair point. But, I could contend that the overwhelming majority of those Timberwolves teams that lost in the first round were simply not better than the teams that beat them. In fact, if I'm not mistaken, only once in those 7 first round exits did the Timberwolves have a better record than their opponent. Only once in those 7 first round playoff losses did they have homecourt advantage. Those teams really were not very good compared to the other Western Conference elite until the 2002-03 season. And, even then it was against the three-time defending Champion LA Lakers who took the regular season easy after three straight les. Not really much of an advantage winning one more regular season game than those Lakers that year.

Did Tim Duncan elevate the play of his teammates? Absolutely. KG really couldn't do the same, but perhaps his teammates were just really not that good.

Talentwise, I believe they are about equal. I think Duncan's talents are more relevant for his position, but they both are capable from a strictly talent standpoint of leading a Championship team. Where KG is lacking is his ability to inspire teammates. Players love playing with Duncan. Players take pay cuts to join or stay with the Spurs, and a big part of that is Duncan.

Like you said, "part" of it is Duncan. I think much of it is the organization itself and how prudent and smart they've proven to be with personnel decisions. Weigh that just as much, because at the end of the day, who a player plays "for" might be as much of a factor as who a player plays "with." Take Duncan and KG out of the equation, and you get to play with a team that's coached by Gregg Popovich and run by RC Buford or a team that is coached by Flip Saunders/Duane Casey and run by Kevin McHale. No Duncan and no KG on either team. Which team do you choose?

Players pay lip service to Garnett, but there are clear problems with his leadership. Not every instance was his fault, but there has been a pattern.

- Marbury left to get out of KG's shadow
- Wally never got along with KG
- Spreewell was unwilling to return to the Wolves unless they gave him an insane amount of money
- He punched a rookie in practice
- Randy Wittman publically questioned KG's leadership this past season.

This could be true, but I think it's more conjecture than anything. Marbury hasn't exactly proven to be a team player either. Wally hasn't proven to be a winner without KG. Sprewell's idiocy has nothing to do with KG. And, Ricky Rickert wasn't a rookie. He was training camp fodder who wasn't going to make the team anyway. Randy Wittman can criticize KG all he wants. When head coaches are on a sinking ship, they will say a lot of things. Popovich has before questioned many of the Spurs players' toughness and desire, including Duncan. Mostly in a ploy to motivate those players. Thing is, you tend to forget those criticisms because the Spurs win.

This, IMO, is the biggest difference between Duncan and KG.

The rings vs. no rings argument is often a weak one, but here it's not just a matter of 4 vs. none. It's 4 vs. not even CLOSE. In my Spurs homer mind, this argument was settled in 2003... and it's only gotten more conclusive since then.

Got no problem with that. In fact, I've said several times that I'm not arguing against the notion that Duncan is better. He certainly is. I argue at the notion of tearing down KG in the process. KG isn't as great as Duncan. But, then again, what other power forwards have been? The other great power forwards like Karl Malone and Charles Barkley don't touch Duncan either, and they were considered the top 2 or 3 PFs in the history of the game for a while before Duncan. My whole point is that KG is not that far off, especially if you consider only talent. Moreover, I still contend that much of Tim Duncan's success that separates him from another great player like KG is the situation he found himself in with the Spurs organization, teammates like David Robinson and Avery Johnson and then Manu and Tony, and the Spurs' front office. Now, I'm not saying if you switch KG with Tim, that KG wins four les and Tim wins zero. But, if you did in fact switch them and their franchises, I certainly don't think it would still be the same, Tim 4 and KG 0.

I know it's a long shot but I'm kind of hoping Boston misses the Playoffs this year. I think that would be a pretty definitive answer for everyone.

I'm obviously a KG fan. But, I hope the opposite. Not necessarily this year, but in the next 3 years, I hope KG wins a le to prove that it was more Kevin McHale's fault than anything. The only problem with KG now is that he still plays for a moron in Danny Ainge.

[Spurminator]

I can't imagine Kevin Garnett ever missing the playoffs playing for RC Buford or Gregg Popovich.

Maybe not... But I really can't even imagine Kevin McHale assembling a team that Tim Duncan couldn't lead to the Playoffs. I know that's just conjecture, but I really think you'd have to have the worst of the worst... and not just bad talent, but destructive.

I'm obviously a KG fan. But, I hope the opposite. Not necessarily this year, but in the next 3 years, I hope KG wins a le to prove that it was more Kevin McHale's fault than anything. The only problem with KG now is that he still plays for a moron in Danny Ainge.

Yeah another part of me thinks it would be great theater for KG and Duncan to meet in the Finals. So if the argument has to be settled that way, I'm all for that too.

[Darrin]

Both players are Hall-of-Fame bound. Both players are among my favorite to watch. Their flavors are different and let's be thankful for that. If I had to choose between one or the other, I'd take Duncan. The truth is I look forward to seeing Kevin Garnett 14 times next year (before the postseason).

[Kamnik]

My topic going 5 pages....

Something must be wrong....

Offseason sucks if you are a Spur fan.

[ambchang]

From reading these threads, I am assured that Parker and Ginobili both hit the ground running coming into the league, that they were the All-Stars they were back in 2002 and 2003, better than Terrell Brandon, Szcerbiak, Cassell and Sprewell in their respective primes, that Robinson was his MVP self all the way up till he retired, that Horry saved Duncan's butt in all 4 championships, that the Spurs FO is so great that Duncan should be honoured to play for the Spurs. That lucky bas , if anything, Duncan should pay the Spurs $18 million to play with them.

[JamStone]

You don't read very well.

[upTD]

You don't read very well.

all in all, KG < TD.

[Findog]

Is this thing still going on?

Two points:

1) Garnett has not had as good of a situation as Duncan. Duncan's had better coaches, better supporting players, a better GM, etc.

2) Straight up, Duncan is still better than KG. If you trade them straight up for each other in 1998, the Spurs are still an elite team, probably would've won a le, but they wouldn't have four les. The T-Wolves wouldn't be a dynasty, or even have a le at all probably, but they would've made it out of the first round more than once, and they wouldn't have missed the playoffs three years running.

[team-work]

Hi, Spurs fans! I haven't posted for a while, but I'm constantly reading the posts.

This topic has aroused my interest for a long time. I think so many good points have already been mentioned & need not be repeated. Duncan is my long-time favorite player but I also like KG (a of my few favorite non-Spurs player).

May I shift the discussion from "who's the better player" to "who's the rarer player to find?" I think talented players like KG, Kobe, Lebron James are difficult to find, but people like Duncan, who's so dedicated to winning, enjoys working with teammates, so good at basketball fundamentals, are even rarer.

[TDMVPDPOY]

ppl like to play the blame game td had good management etc...

thats just like saying jordan benifited playin under phil and etc...replace him with clyde and he would win also....

thats just a lame excuse that could be use for everyone....

[mathbzh]

ppl like to play the blame game td had good management etc...

thats just like saying jordan benifited playin under phil and etc...replace him with clyde and he would win also....

thats just a lame excuse that could be use for everyone....

Even before winning a le Jordan proved he was the best 28 pts / 6 rbds / 6 ast shooting 51% in his rookie season is just enough to understand this.

But the question is interresting. How great would you judge Jordan if is carreer had broken (for an injury or anything else) in 1990 before he had the teammates to win a le?

[Demo Dick Marcinko]

Even before winning a le Jordan proved he was the best 28 pts / 6 rbds / 6 ast shooting 51% in his rookie season is just enough to understand this.

But the question is interresting. How great would you judge Jordan if is carreer had broken (for an injury or anything else) in 1990 before he had the teammates to win a le?

In my opinion, whether he won 6 nba les or 0, zilch, nada - his place in nba history would still be the same. Let's face it, there's never ever been anyone that could do the things he did. He was just so extraordinary and exciting to watch. Everybody would love to watch him just to see what he would do next. I run out of superlatives just trying to describe him.

I like Mike!

[41times]

so now that KG has some real talent surrounding him in Boston (or at least 2 other guys with talent) how far will Boston go? I predict to the Finals and lose to the West.

[ambchang]

so now that KG has some real talent surrounding him in Boston (or at least 2 other guys with talent) how far will Boston go? I predict to the Finals and lose to the West.

That team is poorly constructed, with no point and inside scoring. It perhaps would come out of the East, but I am putting my $ on the Bulls, especially if they can acquire a decent inside scorer. Then it's Cavs, Heat and Pistons. Boston is probably #5 in my book.

[exstatic]

But the question is interresting. How great would you judge Jordan if is carreer had broken (for an injury or anything else) in 1990 before he had the teammates to win a le?

Dominique's peer and equal. 'Nique put up some pretty damn good numbers himself, and was probably a flashier player. Most of you peeps aren't old enough to remember Jordan described as a choker and loser who couldn't win the big game. If he exits at the point in time named above, that would have been his legacy.