SacKings4Life21
Bench
Who do you think is better? ITs tought because most poeple give the nod to Duncan because he had the rings... but KG never had as good of a team as Duncan... I go a slight nod to KG. Waht ya think
Duncan vs. KG
- Thread starter SacKings4Life21
- Start date
T
thesanityannex
Guest
I think this has nothing to do with the Kings.
SacKings4Life21
Bench
ooopss i put it in the wrong area... ment to be in the nba
vladetomiller
Bench
And COACHING
Kev.in
Starter
Garnett is the better player. Duncan is basically a center, so people see him on the block scoring and then contesting shots at the rim and it sometimes gets overvalued. Garnett has just had bad luck. All these years in the league and they've only gotten it together for a nice postseason run one time.
There isn't a single player in the NBA that will make your squad a guaranteed 55 win team. We've never seen Duncan in a situation where he had to absolutely carry a team for a whole season. Duncan isn't a guarantee of 55+, but Duncan + secondary star + Popovich is a guarantee.
Just imagine what KG's career would be like if he'd played with David Robinson instead of Erivn Johnson. With Tony Parker this season instead of Marko Jaric. With Ginobili instead of Trenton Hassell. Maybe some day we'll get to see how KG looks playing on a team that goes 3 deep at every position.
There isn't a single player in the NBA that will make your squad a guaranteed 55 win team. We've never seen Duncan in a situation where he had to absolutely carry a team for a whole season. Duncan isn't a guarantee of 55+, but Duncan + secondary star + Popovich is a guarantee.
Just imagine what KG's career would be like if he'd played with David Robinson instead of Erivn Johnson. With Tony Parker this season instead of Marko Jaric. With Ginobili instead of Trenton Hassell. Maybe some day we'll get to see how KG looks playing on a team that goes 3 deep at every position.
mcsluggo
Starter
BMiller52 said:
Frankly, if you had to call one of them a choker it would be Duncan. He is fortunate, because he has been surrounded by alot of players who definately are NOT chokers, but his production all around the floor tends to really scale back in crunch times. Duncan is great in blowouts, and he is great for three quarters, ... but clutch? Hell no.
Q: What has KG done to warrant a "choker" label?
A: Have his second best player consistantly be Wally Sczjhgxcdzxvzjbiak. (and for the record, wally sucks)
vladetomiller
Bench
plus Duncan is the softest post player to be hyped so much in this league.
How many times have seen touch fouls called when Duncan has the ball whereas when other post players are around they are treated differently. Even comparing him with Webb in his good ole days, didnt get the kind of calls that duncan always gets and got.
I give it that he is very sound fundamentally and plays within the system and knows how to really play the game, but imo he was not qualified to get the mvp awards in any of those seasons. KG is and was far better than duncan
How many times have seen touch fouls called when Duncan has the ball whereas when other post players are around they are treated differently. Even comparing him with Webb in his good ole days, didnt get the kind of calls that duncan always gets and got.
I give it that he is very sound fundamentally and plays within the system and knows how to really play the game, but imo he was not qualified to get the mvp awards in any of those seasons. KG is and was far better than duncan
mcsluggo said:
Umm i would give lots of credit to Duncan for making his teammates better. Guys like Parker or Manu wouldn't have that much success if they are not with Duncan. Actually, Duncan really has been a clutch player through out his career, just not this season because he doesn't even need to be clutch most of the time (since its always blow-out win for them).
KG probably is the best all-around player in the NBA...inside, outside, offense, defense, passing, etc. Only 1 thing people complain about him is that he doesn't get to the low block area often. He has all the skills, power, height and speed to dominate inside, something that not many players can do it nowaday.
Anyways, in terms of talent, I think KG is a much better player than Duncan. KG probably is the most all-around player in NBA...offense, defense, rebound, passing, inside, outside....I have little doubt that his talent is among the top 5 players in this league (some say top 3). But I think what people give most credit to Duncan is his leadership and his ability to make the players around him to be better. Duncan is a team-player. He is a better teammate and a better leader than KG in my opinion.
mcsluggo
Starter
I certainly wouldn't question that Duncan makes his team-mates better. He has also had some big games in big-game situations (finals against lesser opponents, for isntance).
However, you also sometimes see his stats really really dip when it is nut-crunching time. (see the last olympics, and each time the spurs have been bounced out of the playoffs) He played GREAT against the nets (whatever finals those were) but frankly, those were no contest... and EVERYONE knew it -- even him. No real pressure there. I think he actually has gotten better in crunch time recently, but he is no Kobe (or Manu, for that matter).
However, you also sometimes see his stats really really dip when it is nut-crunching time. (see the last olympics, and each time the spurs have been bounced out of the playoffs) He played GREAT against the nets (whatever finals those were) but frankly, those were no contest... and EVERYONE knew it -- even him. No real pressure there. I think he actually has gotten better in crunch time recently, but he is no Kobe (or Manu, for that matter).
SacTownKid
Hall of Famer
Duncan.
mcsluggo said:
http://www.82games.com/random12.htm
This is what Garnett has done to warrant a choker label. Also he shot a game winner this season a while ago and it hit the top of the backboard. Whenever I watch the TWolves he dominates for 3 quarters and then in the 4th has like 2 points. He's gotta be one of the most unclutch players in the league.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/SAS/2003.html
What was so great about that team? David Robinson was old and gave them 8/8/1. Tony Parker was a good player, but definately not as good as he is now. Manu was averaging 7 points a game off the bench... They're not bad players but that definately wasn't a great supporting cast when he won the championship in 03.
I feel bad for Garnett since the Wolves have a horrible general manager, but still... It's not like the players he played with were garbage some of those years, and he only got out of the first round once.
IMO Garnett is overrated. Keep in mind that this year Duncan's foot is bothering him...
bozzwell
Starter
Manu, Parker and co being so good (and many others before them) has something to do with Duncan.
All those players stinking up on Minny, in numerous combinations except when Cassel was around and Spree played well, has something to do with KG.
KG may be better player statistically, or more pleasing to the eye, but I know who I would draft if it came down to these two.
All those players stinking up on Minny, in numerous combinations except when Cassel was around and Spree played well, has something to do with KG.
KG may be better player statistically, or more pleasing to the eye, but I know who I would draft if it came down to these two.
Kev.in
Starter
BMiller52 said:
Manu wasn't putting up 7ppg during the postseason. Regular season numbers have never really meant much when it comes to the Spurs. They wait for the right time to peak and that's how Popovich runs things. That year the Kings had a better defensive fg% than the Spurs, but compare those numbers in the playoffs. It's not even close. It's all about context. Who were some of the competitors for the crown? A Lakers team with a roster that was left to disintegrate into Kobe, Shaq and nothing else. A Kings team that physically fell apart. The non-defending Mavs, who gave the Spurs a nice run for their money in the WCF. Then there was the Nets. It wasn't a great supporting cast and they didn't play any great teams along the way. They were the best team in what turned out to be a funky year.
Since 2000, Duncan always has something wrong with him. He misses games and has his minutes limited, but they still win. That's not a testament to how good he is, it's a testament to how good the teams he plays for are. He's just not as durable as some of the other greats, including KG. When you're talking about how good a player is, health and durability are huge factors. If not, then Grant Hill and Penny Hardaway have had great careers.
Kev.in
Starter
What does it have to do with him? Bad players are bad players regardless. When has Duncan taken a bad player and raised him to respectability?bozzwell said:
Off the top of my head, I can think of two common teammates of KG and Duncan. Terry Porter (who was the starting pg when KG came into the league) and Rasho Nesterovic. Take a look at the numbers and tell me what city they played better in.
Then take a look at how many different starting centers and point guards have come through Minnesota and compare that to the consistency Duncan has played next to.
Duncan has all the advantages in terms of teammates, front office, coaching, consistency in the franchise, the luck of being drafted to a team that wasn't really even that bad. He has all the advantages except for one, that being his ability as a basketball player.
As far as the late-game play goes, neither is too hot, but name a big man who is. Clutch play is all about the guards and we all know who's played with the better guards. With that in mind, take a look at Duncan's clutch play #s from 82games.com and compare it with Garnett's clutch play stats.
bozzwell
Starter
Kev.in said:
What conclusion exactly am I supposed to make from the clutch stats you posted links to? That KG is better passer and has better hands than TD in the clutch? Well he has better hands and is a better passer full stop. Besides, I never said that KG is not clutch.
I also looked up basketball reference web site and one thing that strikes me is that TD's and KG's stats are much closer then I would have guessed. The main difference is that KG made $80 million more in 2 more years in the league then TD. And that TD's got rings.
I don't think that I am in any way dimishing KG's greatness by suggesting that I would rather draft TD then KG. Put KG on 05/06 Kings and we're odds on favorite to trash Detroit in the finals. Put KG in the same position, and I think we could still win it all but I am not betting my house on it.
I can't really put my finger on it, and like you pointed out, it is really difficlut not to look at two franchises that they play for when judging their record (Spurs good, Minny bad, bad). Sometimes I think that KG is simply SG/SF trapped in a situtation that requires him to play PF/C and if he was 3-4 inches shorter and played pure SG/SF we would be comparing him with MJ, not TD. But he isn't. And if we can blame Minny for KG's record, why doesn't he? At what point exactly does KG stand up to the tyrany of ex-clippers (Kandiman and Jaric) crimping his style?
Minny will miss playoffs for the second year in a row. Even though some of his teammates suck fur off the cat's ***, a team with healthy KG should not look up and see Utah, NOK, and even LA Kobes. There you go, Kobe playing 1-on-5 >> then Minny?!
Similar threads
- Locked
- Poll
