Can KG be the best scorer on a championship team?

[drza44]

When it comes to scoring, Garnett is held to a standard that has always puzzled me.  It's like, the labels that have been put on him by some (i.e. not clutch, must be a secondary scorer, etc.) simply persist no matter what his actual output on the court.

To answer the OP, yes, KG can definitely be the leading scorer on a champion.  As has been pointed out, he was really the leading scorer on the '08 team.  In the regular season he scored more when he was out there he just played fewer minutes, but in the postseason when he played the same role with normal playing time he was the leader.

Another way to look at it, Garnett is pretty much exactly the same scorer as Tim Duncan, especially once he made the full time move to PF in 2002.  From '97 (when Duncan was drafted) to '08 (the site I'm using hasn't updated yet), Duncan has averaged 21.6 points on 50.8% FG shooting and KG has averaged 21.7 points on 49.4% FG shooting.  Since moving to full-time PF in 2002, KG averaged 22.1 ppg on 50.5% FG vs Duncan's 20.6 ppg on 50.6% FG.  Essentially, on offense, KG and Duncan have almost the exact same output.  Whether one operates more out of the post or not isn't especially relevant, since their individual output, their contributions to team offensive efficiency, and their individual efficiencies are all as even as 2 players can be.

Between them, Duncan and KG have been the leading scorers on 5 of the last 11 championship teams.  And the Pistons also won one in there with a team that KG would have easily been the leading scorer on.  His scoring output is just fine for leading a championship team.

[KG Living Legend]

 Who cares? We do have an awesome team with 5 guys that can score maybe more. That's not KG's strength never has been never will be. He's 1 of the best big men  all time. And I love me some KG. Could Russell have done it? NO. Is he one of the best ever?  Yes.

[BASS_THUMPER]

kg has the ability to be a leading scorer on a championship team? sure

after that injury that i still think will be a problem thats why we got sheed...do we wanna run him to his max? nope

[Mr October]

Considering that the leading scorers on 2004 Detroit looked like this:

1     Richard Hamilton 17.6
2    Chauncey Billups 16.9
3    Rasheed Wallace 13.7
4    Tayshaun Prince 10.3
5    Mehmet Okur    9.6
6    Corliss Williamson 9.5
7    Ben Wallace    9.5
8    Mike James    6.3
9    Chucky Atkins    6.2
10    Elden Campbell    5.6


I'd say that it's 100% fact to say that "at some point during his career KG could have been the best scorer on a title team." Heck, looking at that he'd still have a shot (a very very long one) at still being the leading scorer on a title team, as long as there's 4 other starters in the 12-15 range (I don't see KG averaging more than 16-17 ppg at most for the rest of his career), and some bench players in the 9-12 range.

In general, though, I'm in the camp that from this point on, KG doesn't realistically have a shot at leading a championship team in scoring, but that from his rookie year to 2008 he definitely could have been, with a couple different roster moves, etc.

Excellent team example. Although Pierce is the go to guy in the clutch, anyone can lead the team in scoring.

I could easily see KG being a leading scorer. But he knows his efforts are best needed on D.

[Jon]

Considering that the leading scorers on 2004 Detroit looked like this:

1     Richard Hamilton 17.6
2    Chauncey Billups 16.9
3    Rasheed Wallace 13.7
4    Tayshaun Prince 10.3
5    Mehmet Okur    9.6
6    Corliss Williamson 9.5
7    Ben Wallace    9.5
8    Mike James    6.3
9    Chucky Atkins    6.2
10    Elden Campbell    5.6


I'd say that it's 100% fact to say that "at some point during his career KG could have been the best scorer on a title team." Heck, looking at that he'd still have a shot (a very very long one) at still being the leading scorer on a title team, as long as there's 4 other starters in the 12-15 range (I don't see KG averaging more than 16-17 ppg at most for the rest of his career), and some bench players in the 9-12 range.

In general, though, I'm in the camp that from this point on, KG doesn't realistically have a shot at leading a championship team in scoring, but that from his rookie year to 2008 he definitely could have been, with a couple different roster moves, etc.

Excellent team example. Although Pierce is the go to guy in the clutch, anyone can lead the team in scoring.

I could easily see KG being a leading scorer. But he knows his efforts are best needed on D.

I wouldn't use Detroit as an example.  They were pretty much a fluke.  The Lakers self-destructed more than the Pistons won and most other years that team wouldn't even be good enough to get to the Finals (in my opinion, next year's Celtics, Cavs, Magic, Spurs, and Lakers are all better than that title team was). 

As for KG, I tend to agree with the "who cares?" sentiment.  We'll probably never know.  I will say that he's not the guy who generally has the most plays drawn up for him the 4th quarter.  But that certainly doesn't rule out the possibility he could handle more of the offensive burden.  However, I do question this: if KG is really capable of being a go-to-guy in the 4th, why does Doc tend to go to PP more?  It would seem that if all things were even, you'd want to go to the 7-foot guy with crazy athleticism over Pierce. 

[Fafnir]

Considering that the leading scorers on 2004 Detroit looked like this:

1     Richard Hamilton 17.6
2    Chauncey Billups 16.9
3    Rasheed Wallace 13.7
4    Tayshaun Prince 10.3
5    Mehmet Okur    9.6
6    Corliss Williamson 9.5
7    Ben Wallace    9.5
8    Mike James    6.3
9    Chucky Atkins    6.2
10    Elden Campbell    5.6


I'd say that it's 100% fact to say that "at some point during his career KG could have been the best scorer on a title team." Heck, looking at that he'd still have a shot (a very very long one) at still being the leading scorer on a title team, as long as there's 4 other starters in the 12-15 range (I don't see KG averaging more than 16-17 ppg at most for the rest of his career), and some bench players in the 9-12 range.

In general, though, I'm in the camp that from this point on, KG doesn't realistically have a shot at leading a championship team in scoring, but that from his rookie year to 2008 he definitely could have been, with a couple different roster moves, etc.

Excellent team example. Although Pierce is the go to guy in the clutch, anyone can lead the team in scoring.

I could easily see KG being a leading scorer. But he knows his efforts are best needed on D.

I wouldn't use Detroit as an example.  They were pretty much a fluke.  The Lakers self-destructed more than the Pistons won and most other years that team wouldn't even be good enough to get to the Finals (in my opinion, next year's Celtics, Cavs, Magic, Spurs, and Lakers are all better than that title team was). 

As for KG, I tend to agree with the "who cares?" sentiment.  We'll probably never know.  I will say that he's not the guy who generally has the most plays drawn up for him the 4th quarter.  But that certainly doesn't rule out the possibility he could handle more of the offensive burden.  However, I do question this: if KG is really capable of being a go-to-guy in the 4th, why does Doc tend to go to PP more?  It would seem that if all things were even, you'd want to go to the 7-foot guy with crazy athleticism over Pierce. 

He goes to KG quite a lot in the fourth. Doc has Pierce start the plays but KG is often the first or second option of the various plays they run. But KG is a good shooter and the team's best player, people tend to stay on him.

KG is a PF, someone has to get him the ball. In late game situations that can be problematic if the other team is denying well, or is willing to double.

Again though KG scored more in the 4th than Pierce, and go look at the playoffs. There were several games where KG was the focus late in the fourth.

[Greenbean]

I think the reason people would not feel comfortable saying a team can win with Garnett leading the team in scoring is because of the way he scores. He is not incredibly dynamic relying mostly on jumpshooting and the occasional post with a favorable matchup. However, it you think about it we should feel even more comfortable if Garnet is scoring alot because that means the ball is hoping and there is no one on one stagnant offensive sets. This is why Garnet scored so much in the playoffs because the ball movement was crisp giving KG alot of open looks. The movement also gave him more opportunity to post up and get good looks close to the basket. I for one will look at KG's scoring looks as an early indicator of how this team will fare this season.