Author Topic: Great podcast about Garnett and Duncan  (Read 4681 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Great podcast about Garnett and Duncan
« Reply #15 on: January 14, 2020, 09:58:21 PM »

Offline Somebody

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5819
  • Tommy Points: 392
  • KANSEI DORIFUTO
Appreciate everyone saying that they're in the same class - I've seen a ton of fans dismiss KG like he was a Barkley, Dirk or Malone by just looking at volume scoring.

Re: Great podcast about Garnett and Duncan
« Reply #16 on: January 14, 2020, 10:08:06 PM »

Offline gouki88

  • Global Moderator
  • JoJo White
  • ****************
  • Posts: 16257
  • Tommy Points: 930
  • 2019 CS Historical Draft Champion
Agree that TD and KG are on the same level. KG had less injury luck and much less luck regarding where he was drafted, but Duncan has more longevity, probably a testament to his professionalism.

Would happily have either on this team right now ;D

Re: Great podcast about Garnett and Duncan
« Reply #17 on: January 15, 2020, 01:08:27 PM »

Offline bdm860

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5153
  • Tommy Points: 2171
Gave this a listen yesterday, and it was a very good discussion.  Interestingly, when they broke it down, both came to the same conclusion that KG was better.  I probably had Duncan slightly ahead of KG before listening, but now would find it hard to argue with their reasoning.

One interesting thing I thought that they didn't really touch on in a way I would have liked, but at the beginning of the podcast the host talked about a question he put out on Twitter, who had the higher basketball IQ: Duncan or KG? And Duncan got something like 78% of the votes.

Never thought about it before then, and I would have said Duncan, and I would have guessed most would say Duncan (which they did), but never really thought about why.  What was it that made Duncan's bball IQ higher?  And to me it really just come down to stereotypes: personality, demeanor, system, play style, etc, that we often see with things like race, class, etc.

KG - playing with such visible emotion and energy, is all over the place, the trash talk, comes off a little more "raw" in interviews, skipped college.  Leads one to think he's more athletic and energetic than intelligent.

Duncan - as pretty much the opposite in every way (except overall effectiveness), plays slower, calmer, etc., stayed 4 years in college even when he could have came out early and possibly have been the #1 pick.  Things usually associated with high intelligence in scouting lingo.  So of course he's seen as more intelligent.

It's like Duncan has a lot of qualities typically used to describe high IQ guys, while KG has all the qualities to describe freak athletes.  Something that often goes along race lines.  From a Vice article looking at the 2015 NFL draft:
Quote
Only black players were described as: gifted, aggressive, explosive, raw, and freak. Only white players were described as: intelligent, cerebral, fundamentally, overachiever, technician, workmanlike, desire, and brilliant.

Same thing a lot of people probably do if asked who had the higher bball IQ:  Fab Five players like Chris Webber,  Jalen Rose or Duke players like Christian Laettner, Grant Hill?

But could I really point to anything in Duncan's or KG's game that made one seem like they had the higher or lower bball IQ besides their demeanor, personality, and associated scouting buzz words?  Not really.



After 18 months with their Bigs, the Littles were: 46% less likely to use illegal drugs, 27% less likely to use alcohol, 52% less likely to skip school, 37% less likely to skip a class

Re: Great podcast about Garnett and Duncan
« Reply #18 on: January 15, 2020, 01:13:45 PM »

Offline hwangjini_1

  • Reggie Lewis
  • ***************
  • Posts: 15304
  • Tommy Points: 2098
  • bammokja
impossible to really compare each player given their similarity in talent level being in such disparent situations.

KG in san antonio, a great coach who could train and utilize him better. surrounded by a herd of good players.

Duncan in minnesota, a series of coachs with a series of approachs and agendas. surrounded by some really uneven talent.

would SA have won more championships with KG? i dont know.
I believe Gandhi is the only person who knew about real democracy ó not democracy as the right to go and buy what you want, but democracy as the responsibility to be accountable to everyone around you. Democracy begins with freedom from hunger, freedom from unemployment, freedom from fear, and freedom from hatred.
- Vandana Shiva

Re: Great podcast about Garnett and Duncan
« Reply #19 on: January 15, 2020, 01:29:59 PM »

Offline GreenFaith1819

  • Reggie Lewis
  • ***************
  • Posts: 15109
  • Tommy Points: 2751
Give me the 2011-12 KG at Center



C - 2011-12 KG
F - Gordon Heyward
F - Jayson Tatum
SG - Jaylen
PG - Kemba

Bench - Marcus, Enos, Theis, Semi, Wannamaker, etc, etc, etc -

Still a contender?
Augustus Freeman IV - the Superman of the South. Read Milestone Comics.

Good Trouble.

Re: Great podcast about Garnett and Duncan
« Reply #20 on: January 15, 2020, 01:59:29 PM »

Offline Who

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 38981
  • Tommy Points: 2086
One of the questions that gets asked a lot is how would KG have done in San Antonio. I think it is also interesting to ask the reverse and wonder how Duncan would have done in Minnesota.

------------------

Duncan benefited from having a more prototypical big man. He was easier to build around because of his willingness to play through the low post and to play the center position.

I believe he would've had more success in Minnesota than KG because Duncan's game was more the norm and easier to understand and build around whereas KG was more unusual (as a high post big) and harder to build around.

Would he have won a title there? Nah. But I do think he would've had more playoff success than KG did.

KG's teams only had one year where they had enough talent to win a Championship and they got hit by the injury bug in the playoffs. Nothing he could do about that.

C - Duncan
F - Joe Smith (or Rasho Nesterovic)
F - Wally Szczerbiak
G - Anthony Peeler
G - Terrell Brandon

I would have loved to have seen Duncan on those T-Wolves teams. I always enjoyed watching them when KG was there. They didn't have enough top level talent but they did have some good talent. Better than they are often given credit for. Usually good depth too and a quality head coach in Flip Saunders.

They were a lot of fun to watch. Always executed so well on offense. High IQ team.
Boston Celtics

C: Marc Gasol, Nene, Jaren Jackson Jr
F: Pau Gasol, Rasheed Wallace
F: Kevin Durant, Danny Granger, R-Jefferson
G: Allan Houston, Jason Richardson, Sprewell
G: Steve Nash, John Stockton, Goran Dragic

Re: Great podcast about Garnett and Duncan
« Reply #21 on: January 15, 2020, 03:13:28 PM »

Offline GreenFaith1819

  • Reggie Lewis
  • ***************
  • Posts: 15109
  • Tommy Points: 2751
Yeah...after checking out Basketball Reference I'd find it VERY difficult to believe that Kevin Garnett would NOT have won multiple championships in SAS...

Check out these rosters and simply switch out Tim Duncan with KG.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/SAS/1999.html

https://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/SAS/2000.html

https://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/SAS/2001.html

https://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/SAS/2002.html

https://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/SAS/2003.html

https://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/SAS/2003.html

https://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/SAS/2005.html

You can call Tim Duncan a traditional Big all you want - and I'd agree with you - but there is NO denying that you can place Kevin Garnett's stats in the EARLY 2000's up against ANYONE's.....

Additionally - that ROSTER and COACH from SAS....Prime David Robinson....Manu...Prime Tony Parker......quality Bigs...depth........

Again - I'm thankful for how it all played out with KG in him getting to BOS. But dude was criminally underrated....even NOW, on here..

As much as we may dislike LeBron James we CANNOT criticize the man for dictating his OWN career........
Augustus Freeman IV - the Superman of the South. Read Milestone Comics.

Good Trouble.

Re: Great podcast about Garnett and Duncan
« Reply #22 on: January 15, 2020, 04:49:33 PM »

Offline petbrick

  • Daniel Theis
  • Posts: 239
  • Tommy Points: 33
But could I really point to anything in Duncan's or KG's game that made one seem like they had the higher or lower bball IQ besides their demeanor, personality, and associated scouting buzz words?  Not really.

Duncan had a longer level of performance at the absolute upper echelon of the game? Injuries play a part but (to be really egregious with my examples) you don't see people lining up to pencil Penny Hardaway in as one of the best point guards of all time even though he absolutely could have been had he stayed healthy.

But speaking as a fan, I will always prefer KG.

Re: Great podcast about Garnett and Duncan
« Reply #23 on: January 16, 2020, 05:54:27 AM »

Offline Somebody

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5819
  • Tommy Points: 392
  • KANSEI DORIFUTO
But could I really point to anything in Duncan's or KG's game that made one seem like they had the higher or lower bball IQ besides their demeanor, personality, and associated scouting buzz words?  Not really.

Duncan had a longer level of performance at the absolute upper echelon of the game? Injuries play a part but (to be really egregious with my examples) you don't see people lining up to pencil Penny Hardaway in as one of the best point guards of all time even though he absolutely could have been had he stayed healthy.

But speaking as a fan, I will always prefer KG.
If you buy what the podcast said they actually had similarly long primes, Duncan beats KG in post prime years to barely get the nod over him in Thinking Basketball's Top 40 list.

Re: Great podcast about Garnett and Duncan
« Reply #24 on: January 16, 2020, 05:58:41 AM »

Offline Somebody

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5819
  • Tommy Points: 392
  • KANSEI DORIFUTO
One of the questions that gets asked a lot is how would KG have done in San Antonio. I think it is also interesting to ask the reverse and wonder how Duncan would have done in Minnesota.

------------------

Duncan benefited from having a more prototypical big man. He was easier to build around because of his willingness to play through the low post and to play the center position.

I believe he would've had more success in Minnesota than KG because Duncan's game was more the norm and easier to understand and build around whereas KG was more unusual (as a high post big) and harder to build around.

Would he have won a title there? Nah. But I do think he would've had more playoff success than KG did.

KG's teams only had one year where they had enough talent to win a Championship and they got hit by the injury bug in the playoffs. Nothing he could do about that.

C - Duncan
F - Joe Smith (or Rasho Nesterovic)
F - Wally Szczerbiak
G - Anthony Peeler
G - Terrell Brandon

I would have loved to have seen Duncan on those T-Wolves teams. I always enjoyed watching them when KG was there. They didn't have enough top level talent but they did have some good talent. Better than they are often given credit for. Usually good depth too and a quality head coach in Flip Saunders.

They were a lot of fun to watch. Always executed so well on offense. High IQ team.
Duncan just had a better floor raising skillset - he could bang into traffic to generate an absurd amount of free throws, as well as overpower opposing big men with his lower body strength for easy inside shots to buoy his efficiency.That resilient volume scoring translates better in the playoffs with poorer supporting casts compared to Garnett's ceiling raising skillset, but doesn't amplify the skillsets of quality teammates the same way Garnett does.
« Last Edit: January 16, 2020, 06:44:11 AM by Somebody »

Re: Great podcast about Garnett and Duncan
« Reply #25 on: January 16, 2020, 06:02:45 AM »

Offline Somebody

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5819
  • Tommy Points: 392
  • KANSEI DORIFUTO
Gave this a listen yesterday, and it was a very good discussion.  Interestingly, when they broke it down, both came to the same conclusion that KG was better.  I probably had Duncan slightly ahead of KG before listening, but now would find it hard to argue with their reasoning.

One interesting thing I thought that they didn't really touch on in a way I would have liked, but at the beginning of the podcast the host talked about a question he put out on Twitter, who had the higher basketball IQ: Duncan or KG? And Duncan got something like 78% of the votes.

Never thought about it before then, and I would have said Duncan, and I would have guessed most would say Duncan (which they did), but never really thought about why.  What was it that made Duncan's bball IQ higher?  And to me it really just come down to stereotypes: personality, demeanor, system, play style, etc, that we often see with things like race, class, etc.

KG - playing with such visible emotion and energy, is all over the place, the trash talk, comes off a little more "raw" in interviews, skipped college.  Leads one to think he's more athletic and energetic than intelligent.

Duncan - as pretty much the opposite in every way (except overall effectiveness), plays slower, calmer, etc., stayed 4 years in college even when he could have came out early and possibly have been the #1 pick.  Things usually associated with high intelligence in scouting lingo.  So of course he's seen as more intelligent.

It's like Duncan has a lot of qualities typically used to describe high IQ guys, while KG has all the qualities to describe freak athletes.  Something that often goes along race lines.  From a Vice article looking at the 2015 NFL draft:
Quote
Only black players were described as: gifted, aggressive, explosive, raw, and freak. Only white players were described as: intelligent, cerebral, fundamentally, overachiever, technician, workmanlike, desire, and brilliant.

Same thing a lot of people probably do if asked who had the higher bball IQ:  Fab Five players like Chris Webber,  Jalen Rose or Duke players like Christian Laettner, Grant Hill?

But could I really point to anything in Duncan's or KG's game that made one seem like they had the higher or lower bball IQ besides their demeanor, personality, and associated scouting buzz words?  Not really.
Aside from the stereotypes, I think most casual fans didn't really realise how valuable Garnett's skillset was as well as how high a player's basketball IQ needs to be to possess that type of skillset.

Re: Great podcast about Garnett and Duncan
« Reply #26 on: January 16, 2020, 06:08:57 AM »

Offline Csfan1984

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6997
  • Tommy Points: 178
Think most see it as Duncan better career and more of a Center playing PF. KG better player and more true PF that had impressive range on defense.

Give me KG all day unless we are asking him to play some center. I'll take Duncan if a lot of switching to center is going on.

Re: Great podcast about Garnett and Duncan
« Reply #27 on: January 16, 2020, 06:41:49 AM »

Offline Somebody

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5819
  • Tommy Points: 392
  • KANSEI DORIFUTO
Anyways I'll post the player profiles Thinking Basketball made about Garnett and Duncan in its top 40 list:

https://www.backpicks.com/2018/03/19/backpicks-goat-8-kevin-garnett/

https://backpicks.com/2018/03/22/backpicks-goat-7-tim-duncan/


Re: Great podcast about Garnett and Duncan
« Reply #28 on: January 16, 2020, 08:44:53 AM »

Offline footey

  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11584
  • Tommy Points: 1449
Iíve got a long car ride coming up, so this will be a fun listen for that...but will be surprised if it can convince me KG is the best ever PF..

1. Duncan
2. Malone
3. Nowitzki
4. Barkley

I think all those guys are better than Garnett, and Anthony Davis will soon eclipse him as well.

Never understood calling Duncan a power forward. I swear that was so he wouldn't be compared 1 on 1 to Shaq.  Duncan played center, period.

Re: Great podcast about Garnett and Duncan
« Reply #29 on: January 16, 2020, 09:20:34 AM »

Offline Who

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 38981
  • Tommy Points: 2086
Garnett and D-Robinson would have been a great tandem. Manu, Parker and Garnett would've been a great trio once those young guards came of age. Gotta believe Garnett would've won some Championships with all those opportunities to do so.

------------------------------------

Then I got thinking about the 1999 Spurs team that won it's first NBA title. Duncan was an MVP candidate from his rookie season (after 4 years of college) but it took KG a few years to get there coming out of high school. Would 1999 have come too soon for KG? KG made his first All-NBA First team in 2000 and established himself as an MVP caliber player that season also. The year before, KG was very very good but not quite at that level. Top 10ish - just inside or just outside.

Do the 1999 Spurs have enough to a win title with the drop-off from the more mature Duncan to the still maturing almost there Kevin Garnett?

David Robinson was still a #1 scoring option in 1998 during Duncan's rookie season. He was the Spurs main scorer for the first half of the season until Duncan took over in the second half after establishing himself as the more versatile and reliable scorer than Robinson was. Robinson took a step back during the second half of that year and another step back the following year. He was still likely young enough and able enough to amp up his scoring while KG continued to develop his. Is that enough to keep the Spurs as 1999 NBA Champs?

That team didn't have a great supporting cast. An old perimeter group of Avery Johnson (33 years old undersized PG), Mario Elie (35 years old) and Sean Elliott (11ppg off a kidney transplant - never the same after that). Their bench did not have a lot. An old Will Perdue. A young Malik Rose. One good shooter in Steve Kerr (33yo). A very old Jerome Kersey at 37 years of age. A good defensive guard in Antonio Daniels. I forgot Jaren Jackson (31yo). He was a good 3&D wing off the bench.

Their finals matchup was a comfortable one. New York lacked size and I would fully expect KG and D-Rob to feast and destroy them. The Lakers in the 2nd round were mess so they should beat them as well. Portland in the Conference Finals would be their main opponent. Their first round opponent would be whoever replaced the T-Wolves as 8th seed. Maybe a challenger but probably not.

There wasn't as much different in the W-L between high and low seeds that year due to shortened 50 game season so some of those low seed teams were dangerous. If Duncan was on the T-Wolves teams, I think they would've won more games in regular season and been higher than the 8th seed. So 7th seed was Sacramento. They were just starting to put things together. San Antonio has clear advantage in that matchup. So probably just Portland standing in San An's way.

------------------------

The 2000, 2001, 2002 seasons - San Antonio too weak on perimeter to beat Shaq & Kobe LA Lakers. David Robinson was continuing to age during this period.

Kevin Garnett was phenomenal in 2003. But I think Duncan was even better and I am not convinced KG could've won a title with that supporting cast. David Robinson was old (37 years old) and playing only 23mpg in the playoffs. He was attempting only 5 FGAs per game while playing very good defense & rebounding well also. Parker was a 2nd year guard averaging 15ppg but was up and down like a yo-yo during that postseason. Manu was a rookie averaging only 20mpg regular season to 27mpg in postseason (7.6ppg rs to 9.4ppg postseason). Stephen Jackson was young too. Only a 12ppg 4rpg 2apg guy. Malik Rose and Bruce Bowen were rock solid glue guys.

Parker and Ginobili would've flourished offensively next to a high post big man like Garnett but I am not convinced they were ready to do so in 2003. They were too young. Lakers most likely winning a 4th straight title that season.

--------------------

Then David Robinson retired and the Ginobili, Parker and KG era truly begins.

Ginobili and Parker took another year before truly establishing themselves as stars in the NBA doing so in the 2005 season. So I am not sure the Spurs win in 2004 either despite KG being at his peak over this 2003 & 2004 period.

But from then on -- 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 -- I think the Spurs are clearly the best team in the league and have a great chance of winning anywhere from 1 to 4 titles over this period.

Then they go head to head with the Lakers of Pau Gasol and Kobe Bryant with a healthy Andrew Bynum, 6th man Lamar Odom and a quality supporting cast.

San Antonio's own supporting cast was aging out during this period. Duncan did not have enough help in the paint and the Spurs lacked quickness, size and athleticism on the wings. As good of a trio as KG, Parker and Ginobili were -- I think the quality of the Spurs supporting cast likely costs them here until the arrivals of Danny Green, Kawhi Leonard and Tiago Splitter. So I will stick with the LA Lakers as title winners in 2009 and 2010.

Edit: Oh, KG got hurt in 2009 didn't he. So that would have definitely wiped them out that year.

-----------------------------

20112012-2015 sees the final Spurs era under Kevin Garnett. An aging Garnett but still the team's anchor complemented by the offensive talents of Tony Parker alongside an aging Manu Ginobili as well as the youth and athleticism of Kawhi Leonard, Danny Green and Tiago Splitter along with some vet experience from guys like Boris Diaw.

Kawhi did not arrive until 2012. Danny Green arrived in late 2011 but did not play much. Established himself in 2012. Tiago Splitter arrived in 2011 but did not establish himself until 2013. I believe Splitter would've gotten more opportunities next to Garnett than Duncan because KG was more of a high post player and more accustomed to playing PF than Duncan was at that point. So I could see Splitter coming to prominence sooner. Still, I do not see them challenging for a title without Kawhi and Danny Green.

So from 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015 the Spurs have 4 shots at winning a title.

I don't know if they get past OKC in 2012. I have trouble remembering that series. James Harden played very well. Their speed and youth causing San Antonio problems. Don't remember much else.

The 2013 and 2014 teams got to the Finals and split the Championship series with the Miami Heat (who were the most talented team in the league 2011-2014 in my opinion).

The 2015 team lost in the first round in 7 games to CP3 / B-Griffin Clippers with Duncan having a great series. The wheels had pretty much come off of Garnett at that point so I do not see that result changing or the 2016 team being an improvement over Duncan's 2016 either.

------------------------------

So the 1999 team has a good chance at a ring.

The 2005, 2006, 2007 and 2008 teams are the best in the league over this period and each team has a great chance at winning a title each season.

The 2012 has a shot against OKC and the 2013 plus 2014 teams that split the Finals matchups against Miami have a good chance of winning titles.

Gotta like KG's chances at winning multiple championships with all those opportunities. That is 8 good opportunities. 4 where they were the clear cut most talented team in the league. 2 more against Miami where they were better coached more cohesive than the most talented team in the league. Plus 1999 where Portland was their only major hurdle.

How many? 3? 4? 5? 6?

No idea. Could have been more than Duncan won. Also could have been less. Or maybe the same.

But it surely would've been more than the 1 KG got playing in Minnesota & an older oft injured Boston team.

Fun to think about KG on those teams.
« Last Edit: January 16, 2020, 09:26:10 AM by Who »
Boston Celtics

C: Marc Gasol, Nene, Jaren Jackson Jr
F: Pau Gasol, Rasheed Wallace
F: Kevin Durant, Danny Granger, R-Jefferson
G: Allan Houston, Jason Richardson, Sprewell
G: Steve Nash, John Stockton, Goran Dragic