Message Board Basketball Forum - InsideHoops

Go Back   Message Board Basketball Forum - InsideHoops > InsideHoops Main Basketball Forums > NBA Forum

NBA Forum NBA Message Board - NBA Fan Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 09-21-2007, 06:18 PM   #1
Pharoh
Can barely lace up my sneakers
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 13
Default Do people understand that Garnett has always been better as a player than Duncan?

They are both great players with Duncan rightfully ranked ahead of Garnett in terms of all time status.

As individual players, Duncan is not better. Garnett is a more dominant player, a team player like Duncan but can pass, score, rebound better than Duncan. Garnett dominates the high post while Duncan dominates the low post. Garnett is better help defender while Duncan is a slightly better man defender. I know some people will talk about Duncan's impact on the game but realize that Duncan plays the most impactful position in the game, that is, a big man playing the low post. It's easier to build around Duncan because of that.

With the newly formed Celtics, Garnett will prove what he is capable of given an actual team. His team will be winning so his efforts will be more recognized and people will finally recognize how great of a player Garnett is and had his half assed former management ever put a team around him, he would be in the top 20 of all time debates right now.

Expect to see "Garnett is the best player in the game" topics soon.
Pharoh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2007, 06:20 PM   #2
RidonKs
NBA Legend
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Free Hat!
Posts: 17,910
Default Re: Do people understand that Garnett has always been better as a player than Duncan?

Quote:
I know some people will talk about Duncan's impact on the game but realize that Duncan plays the most impactful position in the game, that is, a big man playing the low post. It's easier to build around Duncan because of that.
Sooooo, who would you build a team around?

There's your answer.

Garnett could be better than Duncan in literally every aspect of the game, but if you would rather have Duncan than KG, then you consider Duncan the better player. Period.
RidonKs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2007, 06:22 PM   #3
Prodigy
Diaw Fan
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: VanCity
Posts: 1,785
Default Re: Do people understand that Garnett has always been better as a player than Duncan?

Too bad they won't see each other in the finals. Maybe in 09.
Prodigy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2007, 06:24 PM   #4
Richie2k6
Smooth Like Butter
 
Richie2k6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: The Terrordome Team: Nuggets
Posts: 9,906
Default Re: Do people understand that Garnett has always been better as a player than Duncan?

Quote:
Garnett could be better than Duncan in literally every aspect of the game, but if you would rather have Duncan than KG, then you consider Duncan the better player. Period.
If you're talking about who you'd rather have on your team is the better player, then yes. But if you're talking about who you'd rather built around is the better player, then I disagree.
Richie2k6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2007, 06:31 PM   #5
RidonKs
NBA Legend
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Free Hat!
Posts: 17,910
Default Re: Do people understand that Garnett has always been better as a player than Duncan?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Richie2k6
If you're talking about who you'd rather have on your team is the better player, then yes. But if you're talking about who you'd rather built around is the better player, then I disagree.
What's the difference? Are you talking about age?

Who you'd rather have on your team and who you'd rather build around are virtually the same thing, when talking about star players like Duncan and Garnett. I suppose you could make an argument, hell I just made the argument a few days ago that I'd rather have Quintin Ross over Flip Murray because neither are going to be the star of the team, and for that reason, Ross and his defense are more beneficial to virtually any team.

With KG and Duncan though, obviously you're going to be building around one of them, and you would rather build around the one who you'd rather have on you team.
RidonKs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2007, 06:43 PM   #6
Myth
NBA Legend and Hall of Famer
 
Myth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Arizona
Posts: 23,613
Default Re: Do people understand that Garnett has always been better as a player than Duncan?

I could see people taking Garnett in a one on one situation, but to build a championship team I'd take Duncan any day.
Myth is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2007, 06:52 PM   #7
VCMVP1551
NBA sixth man of the year
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Charlie Villanuevas Eyebrows
Posts: 6,971
Default Re: Do people understand that Garnett has always been better as a player than Duncan?

Why compare to players who aren't similar in anyway.
VCMVP1551 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2007, 07:00 PM   #8
Richie2k6
Smooth Like Butter
 
Richie2k6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: The Terrordome Team: Nuggets
Posts: 9,906
Default Re: Do people understand that Garnett has always been better as a player than Duncan?

Quote:
What's the difference? Are you talking about age?
Yeah pretty much.
Quote:
With KG and Duncan though, obviously you're going to be building around one of them, and you would rather build around the one who you'd rather have on you team.
Well I'd say there's a difference between who you'd rather built around and whose the better player. For example, Kobe Bryant is better than Lebron James, but 30/30 GM's would rather built around Lebron right now. That's basically what I'm getting at here, building around a player and the player's skill/talent are very different things.

Forget it anyway, don't even know why I brought that up. I'd rather built around Duncan and I think he's the better player anyway.
Richie2k6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2007, 07:02 PM   #9
RidonKs
NBA Legend
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Free Hat!
Posts: 17,910
Default Re: Do people understand that Garnett has always been better as a player than Duncan?

Oh. I don't consider age as a factor when deciding who's the better of two players. Doesn't really make sense to.
RidonKs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2007, 07:04 PM   #10
Pharoh
Can barely lace up my sneakers
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 13
Default Re: Do people understand that Garnett has always been better as a player than Duncan?

To the question posed by Ridonks, there is a catch in who I'd rather build around or who most would rather build around.

Duncan has actually won before. 4 times he became a champion. The most Garnett got to was a Western Conference Finals appearence. This will draw many people away from picking Garnett.

However, if you were to give me those two players with their respective skill sets and games and tell me to choose on that alone, I would take Garnett as my franchise player.

Imagine Garnett came into a situation like Duncan did and Duncan went to a situation Garnett went into. I can guarantee that many people that would choose Duncan today to build around would choose Garnett given that scenario.
Pharoh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2007, 07:09 PM   #11
RidonKs
NBA Legend
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Free Hat!
Posts: 17,910
Default Re: Do people understand that Garnett has always been better as a player than Duncan?

Well I don't use how much a player has won throughout his career much when ranking players. If Duncan played the exact same way that he has throughout his career, but he only had 1 championship instead of 4, would he be any different of a player? Would his skillset, his impact, how he plays the game change whatsoever? Of course not. Tim Duncan with 1 chip is the same as Tim Duncan with 4 chips. And either way, I'd still mark him as a better player than KG.

Not that the gap between the players isn't extremely close. However, it's not close enough for me to call it a complete toss-up, like say, Deron and Chris Paul. I'd take Duncan with no hesitation, but KG is still right there.
RidonKs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2007, 07:12 PM   #12
i seen hippos
NBA Superstar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 14,986
Default Re: Do people understand that Garnett has always been better as a player than Duncan?

Duncan has done things that have won titles, Garnett hasn't.

What exactly makes him better?
i seen hippos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2007, 07:18 PM   #13
Rockets(T-mac)
NBA sixth man of the year
 
Rockets(T-mac)'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 7,284
Default Re: Do people understand that Garnett has always been better as a player than Duncan?

Quote:
Originally Posted by RidonKs
Well I don't use how much a player has won throughout his career much when ranking players. If Duncan played the exact same way that he has throughout his career, but he only had 1 championship instead of 4, would he be any different of a player? Would his skillset, his impact, how he plays the game change whatsoever? Of course not. Tim Duncan with 1 chip is the same as Tim Duncan with 4 chips. And either way, I'd still mark him as a better player than KG.

Not that the gap between the players isn't extremely close. However, it's not close enough for me to call it a complete toss-up, like say, Deron and Chris Paul. I'd take Duncan with no hesitation, but KG is still right there.
Co-sign. I would take Duncan but the gap isn't that wide.
Rockets(T-mac) is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2007, 07:18 PM   #14
luigi>mario
Now known as Luigi
 
luigi>mario's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,898
Default Re: Do people understand that Garnett has always been better as a player than Duncan?

It don't mean a thing if it ain't got that swing.

Garnett has fire, Duncan has fundamentals.
Duncan wins more, Garnett sells more tickets.

The team who needs to win to earn money chooses Duncan, the team who needs to sell seats takes Garnett.
luigi>mario is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2007, 07:46 PM   #15
kwajo
Missing Since 2009
 
kwajo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: On the water
Posts: 5,995
Default Re: Do people understand that Garnett has always been better as a player than Duncan?

Quote:
Originally Posted by luigi>mario
It don't mean a thing if it ain't got that swing.

Garnett has fire, Duncan has fundamentals.
Duncan wins more, Garnett sells more tickets.

The team who needs to win to earn money chooses Duncan, the team who needs to sell seats takes Garnett.
The San Antonio arenas have seemed pretty full to me. Winning sells, whether it's perceived as boring or not.

This Garnett rating crap is just stupid. He's great, and not far behind Duncan, but the only reason people are even talking about him is because he got traded to Boston. ISH is ruined by "what have you done for me lately" syndrome. Mid-season no one thought Duncan was good still, he was not even in some top 10 lists. Then after he won, he was #1 again. Then Garnett (who was not highly rated by these same people in the season or playoffs) got traded, and now he has all these new Boston fans and all of a sudden he's better than Duncan.

People need to calm down and stop riding the ebbs and flows and be consistent. Garnett = great. Duncan = great. Case closed.
kwajo is offline   Reply With Quote
This NBA Basketball News Website Sponsored by:
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:46 PM.




NBA Basketball Forum Key Links:
InsideHoops Home
NBA Rumors
Basketball Blog
NBA Daily Recaps
NBA Videos
Fantasy Basketball
NBA Mock Draft
NBA Free Agents
All-Star Weekend
---
High School Basketball
Streetball
---
InsideHoops Twitter
Search Our Site













Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. Terms of Use/Service | Privacy Policy