Kevin Garnett is having a career year, and is one of the top candidates for the MVP award. However, he's still being criticised for not shooting too much, for being too unselfish and unwilling to take a lot of shots and carry the scoring load in the fourth quarter. Flip Saunders has dismissed that talk, commenting along the lines of one minute the media will criticise a player for being too selfish and will complain that players these days are too interested in their own stats, and won't put the team ahead of their own selfish goals. The next, they're criticising a player for not being too selfish and for being afraid to shoot. KG is the current spokesperson for the "Can't silence the criticis no matter how I play" club.
John Stockton is one of the most unselfish players in history. He scores more points than he dishes out assists, but since you get more than one point for a field goal, that's bound to happen. In terms of shots, Stockton attempts an average of about 8 per game, while averaging 7.6 apg. For his career, he's averaged 9 shots and 10.5 assists per game. No question, he's unselfish, and so he should be as a traditional type of point guard. But couldn't he be criticised for not stepping up when Karl Malone's shot is inconsistent (see: Finals, NBA, 1997 & 1998)?
Michael Jordan has been criticised for being too selfish, but he's been able to be play a large role on a championship winning team, to say the least. Words like ballhog are used, people can point to the time he scored 64 points in a loss to Orlando or his 9/27 performance in this year's All-Star game to justify that statement, but you guarantee if he didn't score enough, then he would be criticised for not carrying the team and doing what he does best.
Now...
Both John Stockton and Michael Jordan are great players. They rank among the top 10 in various categories (Stock of course is at the top of two), hold individual records and have been major factors in the success of their teams during the 90s. One has been a great playmaker who can be called on to score when needed. The other has proven to be a great scorer, but a player who will defer to his teammates when needed. But you could still call Stockton too unselfish at times, and you could still call Jordan too selfish at times, yet they are still given their due.
So...
Which do you think would make Kevin Garnett a better player? Selfishness or unselfishness? In terms of his scoring average, he's close to the "happy medium" right now. 23.1 ppg and 5.9 apg (from the power forward spot no less) while attempting an average of 18 shots per game.
Personally, I think he should stay the course. Wally Szczerbiak is only averaging 16.8 ppg this season and Hudson can create for himself, so there's less opportunities for KG to pick up assists within the flow of the game (especially since he's not the point guard). He still leads the team in assists. He could probably take a couple more shots per game, or at least try to get to the line more often (which would require more touches anyway) especially in the fourth quarter, but his current play hasn't really hurt the Timberwolves so far this season. It might be a different story come playoff time though.
So what do you think? Is KG too selfish, too unselfish, or is it his supporting cast that is preventing the Timberwolves from advancing past the first round?