Tim Duncan or KG

[guachi]

I was just wondering who you guys think is a better basketball player: Kg or TIm Duncan. Im not talking about nowdays but through their careers.
Id go by a small margin with Tim duncan, allthough my favorite player is Kg. Duncan has been a better rebounder and has more rings. he is also the most effective scorer. The only thing Kg is maybe better is defense, cause he can guard smaller players like Rashard lewis, but again Duncan can guard big centers. So pretty close. 
Other than that for me KG is just cooler player with his fadeways, hakeem shakes and attitude, But lets face it TIm Duncan was unstoppable with the shot against the glass (although it was boring). I never felt confident in Kgs abilities while you knew when tim would have the ball that it was going to be a good play.

[wdleehi]

Duncan. 


Duncan and Shaq where the two best players of this past era. 

[BudweiserCeltic]

I've always felt KG was the better player.

If circumstances were different, KG in San Antonio, Duncan in Minnesota, I think KG would be seen easily as the better of the two, and I don't think the discussion would be as close as it is currently.

But you know, I don't want to take away from Duncan because he's really been a special player on both sides of the ball, and he has been excellent and dominant during the playoffs.

But he's also had the coach and the players, KG really has never had anything. And the year that he actually had something, they were a healthy back away from going all the way...

And then he came to Boston, and won on his first chance.

[Roy Hobbs]

I also vote Duncan.   Both were game changers, but Duncan was a winner from the time he entered the league, and has four rings to his credit.  He's never won fewer than 53 games in a season (other than the lock out year), which is very impressive to me.  I know he's had better teammates, but I also don't see a Duncan-led team suffering in mediocrity or worse.

[BudweiserCeltic]

I also vote Duncan.   Both were game changers, but Duncan was a winner from the time he entered the league, and has four rings to his credit.  He's never won fewer than 53 games in a season (other than the lock out year), which is very impressive to me.  I know he's had better teammates, but I also don't see a Duncan-led team suffering in mediocrity or worse.

Are you sure? Are you so certain, that this team with Duncan instead of Garnett would've been that much better?
http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/MIN/2007.html

Come on.

[Brendan]

If you want to be the man in the NBA you have to be willing to carry the team on offense, KG was capable, but not willing to do this. Vote Duncan.

[BudweiserCeltic]

If you want to be the man in the NBA you have to be willing to carry the team on offense, KG was capable, but not willing to do this. Vote Duncan.

Throughout his playoff career, Duncan has averaged 1.7 more points during the playoffs. Not that big of a difference.

But Duncan clearly has been clutch and has had some big games during the playoffs, but let's not demean what KG has done either.

[Roy Hobbs]

Duncan leads in career points per game (and per minute), rebounds per game (and per minute), FG%, and blocks.  KG leads in assists and steals.  The same holds true for the playoffs.

Duncan has the better stats, and has won more.  From my perspective, Duncan wins by a comfortable margin.

[GreenFaith1819]

I think Duncan was Very fortunate to have The Admiral tutor him early in his career. He enjoyed several years of having David Robinson as his twin Big.

KG didn't have such help, in my opinion.

They don't call Tim Duncan the Big Fundamental for nothing. I've always respected his low-key approach to the game, and his defense. Even though he came to the Spurs with David to mentor him, he was already mega-talented.

Both KG and Tim's games have been so similar - Tim has been more of a traditional Big I think..KG may have had the better all-around game, though, in my opinion.

Now that KG has finally been placed in a system where he can win, we see what he can do.

Tim has always seemed to have really good players around him.

Here's one: If it was Tim Duncan that was traded to Boston back in summer of 2007 along with Ray Allen - would we have won Banner 17? I'd say no.

Kevin Garnett brought Defense Back to Boston. As great a player as Tim Duncan is, I cannot say whether he has the "It" factor that another poster, drza44 mentioned that Garnett has in a Fanpost and related Thread several weeks ago.

In closing and with everything I've noted - it is so hard to pick one. Timmy has the rings, but the Spurs Organization seems to have always tried to place him with the players to do it. He's been fortunate..very.

[More Banners]

Duncan leads in career points per game (and per minute), rebounds per game (and per minute), FG%, and blocks.  KG leads in assists and steals.  The same holds true for the playoffs.

Duncan has the better stats, and has won more.  From my perspective, Duncan wins by a comfortable margin.

TP for posting the reasons for my gut opinion that it's clearly Duncan.

Having the better team doesn't have much to do with it.  KG, throughout his career in Minny, and with us too, is not a go-to scorer.  He is really better as a 2nd (or 3rd) option on offense.  Old Pal Kevin McHale remarked once that the C's got it right by playing KG that way, and when Minny had success, they had Cassell and Spreewell to be the clutch scorers.  I know KG's scored a lot of points, but he's not a #1 option, and never truly was comfortable in that role.  (I might go so far as to call him a superstar-role player).  One other factor on offense:  Even in the post, KG just doesn't draw fouls.  If the other team is going to get in foul trouble, it won't be because KG was aggressive and drew fouls.  Jumpers and fadeaways score points, but draw no fouls.  I'm not sure a team built around KG would have it on the offensive end to win a title...ever.

Duncan has shown to be a different, but still good big-man defender, and a better primary option on offense.  His team was better, but he was still the #1 guy on both sides of the ball all the way to 4 titles.

I go with Duncan, easily.

[BudweiserCeltic]

Duncan leads in career points per game (and per minute), rebounds per game (and per minute), FG%, and blocks.  KG leads in assists and steals.  The same holds true for the playoffs.

Duncan has the better stats, and has won more.  From my perspective, Duncan wins by a comfortable margin.

TP for posting the reasons for my gut opinion that it's clearly Duncan.

Having the better team doesn't have much to do with it.  KG, throughout his career in Minny, and with us too, is not a go-to scorer.  He is really better as a 2nd (or 3rd) option on offense.  Old Pal Kevin McHale remarked once that the C's got it right by playing KG that way, and when Minny had success, they had Cassell and Spreewell to be the clutch scorers.  I know KG's scored a lot of points, but he's not a #1 option, and never truly was comfortable in that role.  (I might go so far as to call him a superstar-role player).  One other factor on offense:  Even in the post, KG just doesn't draw fouls.  If the other team is going to get in foul trouble, it won't be because KG was aggressive and drew fouls.  Jumpers and fadeaways score points, but draw no fouls.  I'm not sure a team built around KG would have it on the offensive end to win a title...ever.

Duncan has shown to be a different, but still good big-man defender, and a better primary option on offense.  His team was better, but he was still the #1 guy on both sides of the ball all the way to 4 titles.

I go with Duncan, easily.

So you think that KG on any of those Spurs teams wouldn't have won a title... ever? Ridiculous thought I think.

KG plays fine the way it is, and he can be a #1 scoring option quite easily. It's just not his strength, and that's fine.

Are we going to knock Bill Russell for his offense? You know, the winningest player in the NBA?

By the way, drawing fouls shooting 68% from the free-throw line is not that great of an accomplishment in my opinion.

[GreenFaith1819]

Duncan leads in career points per game (and per minute), rebounds per game (and per minute), FG%, and blocks.  KG leads in assists and steals.  The same holds true for the playoffs.

Duncan has the better stats, and has won more.  From my perspective, Duncan wins by a comfortable margin.

TP for posting the reasons for my gut opinion that it's clearly Duncan.

Having the better team doesn't have much to do with it.  KG, throughout his career in Minny, and with us too, is not a go-to scorer.  He is really better as a 2nd (or 3rd) option on offense.  Old Pal Kevin McHale remarked once that the C's got it right by playing KG that way, and when Minny had success, they had Cassell and Spreewell to be the clutch scorers.  I know KG's scored a lot of points, but he's not a #1 option, and never truly was comfortable in that role.  (I might go so far as to call him a superstar-role player).  One other factor on offense:  Even in the post, KG just doesn't draw fouls.  If the other team is going to get in foul trouble, it won't be because KG was aggressive and drew fouls.  Jumpers and fadeaways score points, but draw no fouls.  I'm not sure a team built around KG would have it on the offensive end to win a title...ever.

Duncan has shown to be a different, but still good big-man defender, and a better primary option on offense.  His team was better, but he was still the #1 guy on both sides of the ball all the way to 4 titles.

I go with Duncan, easily.

So you think that KG on any of those Spurs teams wouldn't have won a title... ever? Ridiculous thought I think.

KG plays fine the way it is, and he can be a #1 scoring option quite easily. It's just not his strength, and that's fine.

Are we going to knock Bill Russell for his offense? You know, the winningest player in the NBA?

By the way, drawing fouls shooting 68% from the free-throw line is not that great of an accomplishment in my opinion.

TP.

David Robinson and Kevin Garnett? Together? Multiple Championships for the Spurs, IMO.

And your 2nd statement was demonstrated during Kevin Garnett's Player of The Week run earlier this year - no one could stop him and he had as hot a streak offensively as I have ever seen. He had that run for several games where he was our Primary Offensive weapon.

And KG has some Clutchness in him..the game-winner against the Knicks?

And he out-played Timmy earlier this year.

So strange that this thread is here, lol..we play the Spurs tomorrow and will certainly need KG to play well with Perk being out.

[LB3533]

KG is the better player because prior to joining the Celtics...most people gave Tim Duncan the edge because for 4 championships.

If you have to spot a player championship titles when arguing who is the better player.....seriously, come on, that speaks volumes already.

Also, KG's career is harder to compare since he came into the league as a high schooler...Duncan came into the league as a 4 year college vet.

Maybe, best compare the two's most impactful 10 year span or something.

I still vote KG is the better player, both offensively and defensively.

Both have about equal TS%, but KG is better from the 3 and better from the FT.

KG is more agile, more quick, thus better on defense and can guard PG to Centers.

[Roy Hobbs]

Are we going to knock Bill Russell for his offense? You know, the winningest player in the NBA?

The thing about Duncan, though, is that he's been just as good of a defender as KG has been over the course of their careers.  He's 12-time All-Defense (thus far, every season of his career), compared to 10 times for KG.  KG has won DPOY, of course, but I think it's hard to say that one is a decidedly better defender than the other.

[BudweiserCeltic]

Are we going to knock Bill Russell for his offense? You know, the winningest player in the NBA?

The thing about Duncan, though, is that he's been just as good of a defender as KG has been over the course of their careers.  He's 12-time All-Defense (thus far, every season of his career), compared to 10 times for KG.  KG has won DPOY, of course, but I think it's hard to say that one is a decidedly better defender than the other.

And that's not what I'm arguing. I'm arguing against the notion that a team built around KG cannot win... ever. I think you would agree with me that the notion of that is a bit ridiculous, no?