Who's a better player? Duncan Or Garnett?

[Andrew]

duncan is second best player in history,you people must admit it!

Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, which means people are free to disagree with the assertion Duncan is the second best player in history.

[.]

TD has robinson while KG doesnt have any dominant player besides him,,,

but Duncan also didnt have a Dominant player next to him......Robinson was Dominand in the 90´s...but now we are in 2003

[Poollit]

That was not the point of the discussion Kidd and Vins15...vins meant if TD ws soooo great, he wouldnt have been swept... And you saying...he had kobe...Vins15 could turnaround and said Duncan had a more usefull Robinson...so that argument doesnt really make sense...

are u talking bout my post or to vins or what? And what ur saying really doesn't make sense....Kobe was much much more useful than Robinson was that year they got swept. And Derek Fisher had his only good time. And I know what he meant bout TD being so great then he wouldn't have been swept, but that was 2 or 3 years ago.
And then, I turn it around by saying, Duncan wasn't that great back then, but NOW he is that great.

well, it is hard to compare nba superstars!!, some superstars have alot of help from there team mates which leads them to success and some superstars dont! TD has robinson while KG doesnt have any dominant player besides him,,,

but when the superstars have bout the same amount of talent to work with like both these players do....then we can measure their greatness by who can make their teamates bertter.

[Jackal]

are u talking bout my post or to vins or what? And what ur saying really doesn't make sense....Kobe was much much more useful than Robinson was that year they got swept. And Derek Fisher had his only good time. And I know what he meant bout TD being so great then he wouldn't have been swept, but that was 2 or 3 years ago.
And then, I turn it around by saying, Duncan wasn't that great back then, but NOW he is that great.

Yes, I was talking about your post, sorry I didnt make that clear.

You are looking at the situation differently than I am, "Kidd" said duncan is the best bla bla bla he makes it look as if Duncan is UNBEATABLE (Duncan only dont look at team or whatever...) So that is when Vins15 said, if duncan is SOOOOO great as "Kidd" says, then he wouldnt have been swept in the Finals...meaning SINCE he's SOOOO great...he cant lose... Hope this made sense and you can see from our point of view...

Duncan wasnt great back then, I agree...Duncan is great now, I agree again. BUT the point I'm trying to make is, he mite be great...but he's not unbeatable, whereas "Kidd" thinks; Oh Duncan is the 2nd best EVER so he's unbeatable...which isnt the case...everyones beatable, we're just trying to make that clear to "Kidd"...

Get my point? Hope you did .

[Dramacydal]

now at least i got what ure talkin bout cause i didnt understand ur last post either

[GForce11]

Duncan is better, more dominant during the clutch and more of a leader than KG. KG is the more athletic of the two tho. But you can't live off athleticism forever. The numbers don't mean much if you can't win. I don't think the Spurs had a better team than Minny, maybe the coach made the difference? Is Pop better than Flip? I'd say so. Its due or die for Flip i think. If he can't get his new and improved Wolves out of the first round and at LEAST into the Western Finals, then I say they should axe him.

[Jackal]

now at least i got what ure talkin bout cause i didnt understand ur last post either

As I said before, sorry guys, my bad .

Duncan is better, more dominant during the clutch and more of a leader than KG. KG is the more athletic of the two tho. But you can't live off athleticism forever. The numbers don't mean much if you can't win. I don't think the Spurs had a better team than Minny, maybe the coach made the difference? Is Pop better than Flip? I'd say so. Its due or die for Flip i think. If he can't get his new and improved Wolves out of the first round and at LEAST into the Western Finals, then I say they should axe him.

Possible, I also think Pops is a better coach compared to Saunders...
With the crew the wolves have now, they should be good...atleast make it out of the First Round.

West Finals, now thats a whole other ballgame, so many good teams in the West...the playoffs are gonna be MIGHTY fun to watch this season.

[scubilete]

hmmm, sorry to miss a little on this.

KG seems to pass more cause he has more assists because he is the point on tat team becasue the point gaurd shoots the ball more than he psses.

Tony Parker averages apparently as much as the Wolves PG. Plus that has nothing to do with finding your open teammates.

Then you would say that Stockton seemed to give more assists than Magic cause Stockton had better shooters than Magic? It just doesn't fit, Stockton was a better passer and that's why he got more assists, KG is a better passer and even if you try to deny it, that's a FACT!!!!!!!

Dunan assists were only 2 behind KG's while he had a point to run the offense, and KG passes more while he shoots more? Ya! cause KG always has the ball in his hands.

First, 6-3 is not equal 2. KG always has the ball in his hands? The Spurs offense runs thru Duncan, KG is more versatile, that's why he doesn't stay in the post but that doesn't mean he always has the ball in his hands, you just said that the Wolves PG likes to shoot more than passing the ball, so I don't think KG always has the ball in his hands, unless we are talking about some other sport with 2 balls.

And KG's team is just as bad as Duncan's team, both teams would suck w/o their superstar.

No really, the Spurs would do well without Duncan.

Duncan ddn't have a single all star on his team. And he won the finals.

bla bla bla

what the hell can any team do with 2 superstars and 10 super shitty. I'd rather have 1 superstar & 11 good role players than 2 superstars and 10 guys who can't hit a shot, wouldn't you? I guess you find that too incredible to win with good players and just one superstar,

And he won the finals. How many people have done that? not MJ, not Magic, not Shaq, I presume Bird didn't either.

Hmmmm, let's see, Magic did it, Isiah did it, Hakeem did it, do you want me to mention more or is it enough to you?

Maybe you didn't know Magic won the MVP Finals as a rookie, TD didn't do that, now you might ask why I say Magic did?, cause he didn't have Kareem there, that's why,

The reason TD's support looks stronger is becasue he makes them look good.

How does he makes them look good, I mean, you don't support your comments with facts. The spurs players are better, nothing else, don't try to say that it's because Duncan if you know those are proven players which would play that good everywhere,

KG can make the assists, but he just doesn' know how to make everyone better like TD can.

Tim Duncan knows how to make everyone better

ohhhh Steve Smith was an all-star after TD makes him better. Steve Kerr was a good 3 point shooter cause TD makes him that. David Robinson wouldn't ever be considered one of the greatest if TD wouldn't make him one. Maybe Ginobili came as a piece of crap from his country and TD makes him that good defender. Tony Parker was a draft picked as a nobody so TD would make him a good player, I can mention the whole team and still don't find who's that player you are talking about.



Now I'll ask you who is the one TD has made better? Ferry? Kevin Willis?well bring facts not just your word next time.

So maybe KG can do it all, but TD is just a better player to have on yur team.

Finally. You can decide to have TD cause he's a better percentage player, he's a damn good shooter and I'm not talking about 3pts and everything looks easier for him cause his knowledge in the game.

[Jackal]

^^ Good post I agree, TD has better players surrounding him than KG, maybe now the discussion can go further!!

[magius]

okay, i typed a long post a long time ago about why duncan is better than garnett, but excepting the fact that garnett is more versatile, and i dont want to type it again so here are my facts:

1. basketball EXPERTS have named him a back to back nba mvp winner, and since they are experts they probably know full well that only other players in nba history to have done this are:
- bill russell
- wilt chamberlain
- kareem abdul jabaar
- moses malone
- larry bird
- magic johnson
- michael jordan
not a shabby list, eh.

2. Just the second player in NBA history to be named to both an All-NBA Team and an All-Defensive Team in each of his first five seasons (David Robinson was the first)

3. Has been named to the All-NBA First Team all five seasons, the first player since Larry Bird (seventh in NBA history) to be named All-NBA First Team in each of his first four seasons

4. Has earned a spot on the All-Defensive First Team each of the last five seasons after being named to the All-Defensive Second Team as a rookie in '97-98

5. two and counting nba championships.

6. two time nba final mvp. in duncan's case, you CAN judge that he is great from the number of championships he has because he was the most valuable player in both of them, so the argument/logic "so i guess mark madsen is better than kevin garnett" is not applicable.

i take duncans resume over garnett's any day. you dont get these credentials from sheer dumb luck, these awards/accomplishments arent handed over by default of good statistics (though it is certainly a prerequisite), but from countless baskebtall analysts who's lives evolve around the game and know the million intracicies of the game.

and while you can argue duncan's supporting cast isnt that bad, you can't argue its all that good, and yet he still managed 'alright'.

dammit you made me type a lot again!! you're the devil scubilette!! the devil!!!

[scubilete]

Actually I'm not arguing who's better of those 2, everyone has different opinions and you have to learn to live with that. Asking who's better of those 2 were the same situation of asking who was better of Magic & Bird. 2 players sharing the greatness, dominating the game & making it their way.

My argument will come whenever you want to say that TD did it all by himself & he makes everyone better around him. In order for you to make others better, you must share the ball & play with your teammates, that's what KG does, that's what Magic did, that's what Kidd does, that's what Hakeem did, nobody mentioned MJ made anyone better until he learned to do that as well. TD doesn't make any freaky player better, he's that damn good but don't come with foolishnesses like he's making anyone better.

TD's teammates didn't spend half a year in the injury list, also none of them didn't even got to play like Brandon & Lopez did. Even with an injured team KG took that team to win over 50 games in the western conference. Having the bad luck of facing the defending champs with still 2 players out, something that didn't happen with TD.

and while you can argue duncan's supporting cast isnt that bad, you can't argue its all that good, and yet he still managed 'alright'.

Now that's something I can still argue, you take that Spurs team and put any superstar in there, and they will win as much games as the Spurs did, maybe won't win the championship but yet they will win as much as with Duncan they did.

you're the devil scubilette!! the devil!!!

[magius]

of course everyone has their own opinons and of course i can live with that! but whats the point of a forum if all we do is agree with each other?

no, actually, in my opinion , arguing whether duncan is better than garnett is not like arguing whether magic is better than bird. both magic and bird have won back to back mvps and championships. duncan has won a back to back mvp and 2 championships (with 2 very different spurs rosters to boot) and was the mvp of those championships. garnett has won.......

there is no argument from where i'm standing on which of the two's better

Now that's something I can still argue, you take that Spurs team and put any superstar in there, and they will win as much games as the Spurs did, maybe won't win the championship but yet they will win as much as with Duncan they did.

to me, that is an assumption, and assumptions are worthless in validly arguing a point. duncan does make his teammates better. how do i know this? championships are not won by franchise players that dont. mvps are not given to players who are just individually statistically good, they are given to players who are valuable to their team and their teammates. if you are right, and duncan doesnt make his teammates better, than why have coaches and experts throughout the league been quoted as saying otherwise.

before tim duncan, there WAS a superstar (in his prime).... david robinson. did the spurs win the championship then? you've got it backwards, tim duncan is anything but replacable, put him on any team and he makes it a contender.

if you still dont agree with me, thats okay, i respect your independence. but you're wrong you know.

[scubilete]

No, I'm completely right and you missinformed with comments like those and I'll show you why.

duncan does make his teammates better. how do i know this?

Still waiting for names of those TD makes better.

championships are not won by franchise players that dont.

Ah no?, Who is the one you think Shaq has made better? NOBODY. Or are you going to say he makes his teammates better just like Duncan, . The Lakers supporting cast suck and still they win championships but it's not cause Shaq makes anyone better but because those players have done their part.

He won an MVP not cause he made anyone better but because he was the guy with better performance in that year. Shaq does nobody better & won 3peat championships and as well won an MVP, didn't win the next one cause Iverson was too much at that time. But yet, just cause Shaq has accomplished those makes you think he makes everyone better? BEEEEEEP, Wrong.

mvps are not given to players who are just individually statistically good, they are given to players who are valuable to their team and their teammates.

MVP first of all is a majority of vote among certain journalists, it is processed with data & combination of a player with better performance, most valuable for his team & a lot of more details which include whether the guy was nice with them or not. At the very end almost never you will see those journalists standing at the decision of who makes his teammates better for getting an MVP. I'm sorry if I'm opening your eyes so you could see the real world but that's how it is.

If the award would be that much related to make teammates better then Kidd would have been the most valuable in the last 4 years, knowing he DOES make his teammates better. Duncan makes nobody better, he's that damn good but makes nobody better, while you think he does and you can't bring facts to the table it just shows me you are wrong.

if you are right, and duncan doesnt make his teammates better, than why have coaches and experts throughout the league been quoted as saying otherwise.

Nobody besides you and some terribly informed guys have said TD makes his teammates better.

before tim duncan, there WAS a superstar (in his prime).... david robinson. did the spurs win the championship then?

I've been trying to see what's the purpose of that question and now I'll ask you did the Spurs win the championship the last 3 years before this one?, hmmm NO, so why do you make that question regarding a superstar, do you think every superstar has the privilege of getting a championship? Do you know the reason why the Spurs didn't win the championship the last 3 years before this one? If you know the reason why they didn't, then you can answer why David couldn't win the championship against Olajuwon, I thought you knew your signature but I guess you don't.

you've got it backwards, tim duncan is anything but replacable, put him on any team and he makes it a contender.

hmmm, nobody is saying TD is a bad player, of course Tim in any team makes them a contender, just like Shaq,

Now, do you think that just cause they make the team a contender means that they make their teammates better? If you think that, I must say that's the worst definition I've ever heard of making your teammates better. So the team is a contender not cause they are extremely great but because they make their teammates better, now that's funny but BEEEEP, Wrong again.

[Bourbon]

Nobody besides you and some terribly informed guys have said TD makes his teammates better.

Who is the one you think Shaq has made better? NOBODY.

I disagree on both counts. While Duncan and O'Neal aren't Magic Johnson or Jason Kidd-like playmakers, their presences on the floor inherently better their respective teammates. No two players in the game demand more double-teams than TD and Shaq, which by default, makes for wide-open teammates, either cutting to the hoop or spotting up around the perimeter. And as it just so happens, both Duncan and the Diesel are two of the top passing big men in the league.

[scubilete]

No two players in the game demand more double-teams than TD and Shaq, which by default, makes for wide-open teammates, either cutting to the hoop or spotting up around the perimeter.

That's a different term. They make situations for their teammates, not make their teammates better as some are saying here.

And as it just so happens, both Duncan and the Diesel are two of the top passing big men in the league.

Not just KG is the best of all big men passing the ball, but took his injured team to win over 50 games, something guys think that was an easy job. They think the Spurs team is the one that sucked and TD was the only guy doing everything there, that's ignorance.

[magius]

nobody before me has said tim duncan makes his teammates better because it was never and isnt an argument, it was always and is a given that he makes his teammates better and it neednt be said unless to inform the sadly misinformed. its like saying "no one ever says it rains and thus it doesnt rain".

shaq does make his teammates better, you dont have to have lots of points to be a good player, and it is impossible for the laker 'other' players to get more points since shaq + kobe = 60 ppgs of a 100 ppg average. what shaq and tim duncan do do to their teammates is leave them more energy to play good team defense, also, as the focals of their offense they have a calming influence on how the game flows.

i'm not saying every superstar wins a championship, but the superstars that do win the championship have a decided advantage, and the majority superstars that are considered great have won championships with the excpetions of notables like malone. but for every malone there is a jordan, hakeem, and magic.

i think you should open your eyes and face reality, duncan is better than garnett. the mvp is not given to schmucks. look at the past mvps. are they schmucks? yeah, thats right, i didnt think so. it is a pretty lame argument for you to say that the mvp is worthless propaganda and only given to players who suck up to the media. maybe we should give it to mark madsen for donig the chicken dance, eh? and the media doesnt like tim duncan, he doesnt talk which = no story, if you havent been watching, duncan is rerely in the highleet reel or cover stories. the mvp has never been and will never be given back to back to the wrong person, i can guareantee that.

i tell you what, lets stop wasting time, you think whatever you think for whatever reason your thinking it, and i think mine, and i dont think either one of us is gonna change each others mind cuz we're stubbon bastards. so you can have your kg, and i'll have my duncan. ok? ok.

p.s. i didnt say the spurs sucked and i didnt say kg isnt good to have brought his team to 50 wins. where we differ is in you thinking that minnessota is a pool of crap, they are not, minnesota has some alright players, just like san antonio has some alright players.

[Jackal]

i think you should open your eyes and face reality, duncan is better than garnett. the mvp is not given to schmucks.

Did you read his posts? He never said that Duncan ISNT better than Garnett... .

[magius]

then what are we arguing? and why did he bring up the mvp stuff? oh well, you know me.

[scubilete]

Well, your name changing almost made me say you were taking comments not directed to you but after all, it was you,

where we differ is in you thinking that minnessota is a pool of crap, they are not, minnesota has some alright players, just like san antonio has some alright players.

The problem is that you are thinking about a healthy Minny team, I'm talking about last year team.

From the starting line ups:
Minny-----------------------------------Spurs
Brandon (82 games missed) ---- David Robinson (18 games missed)
Wally (30 games missed) ---------

Other significant injuries:
Lopez (82 games missed) ---------- Manu Ginobili (13 games missed)
Joe Smith (28 games missed)

I didn't need to do this, but it was required so you can see what I see and why I say KG took that team to win those games. David & Ginobili together missed almost the same total of games missed by Wally, and that was all the injuries the Spurs had and Wally is just one player of 4 significant injuries for the Wolves.

Yes, the Wolves had some good players, but what's the use if they were injured?, that doesn't count at all. The fact that they mananged to win those games it just shows how great managed KG to take the team to the top.

Regarding the KG vs Duncan, you replied to my comment knowing I'm arguing the statement of Duncan making everyone around him better & Duncan winning the championship by himself. The MVP stuff?, I never mentioned that until someone else said no MVPs get the award without making their teammates better. But oh well, that's their opinion, wrong but it's theirs.

[magius]

point taken! woot! woot! hurah! i think our disagreement lies in whether duncan makes the players around him better and not whether td is a great player or better than kg. neither one of us convinced each other in the slightest in that respect but it sure was fun

group hug!



(sorry for my name changing, but i guess this ones just more recognizable than the old/new and people might think im just butting in in arguments/compliments/irrevelant stupidty ive already made in the past )

[Bourbon]

That's a different term. They make situations for their teammates, not make their teammates better as some are saying here.

How do you make the distinction between a player "making situations" for his teammates and elevating his team's performance?