Tim Duncan or KG

[ManUp]

Tim Duncan for now, but if KG can win another ring I go with KG.

IMO, prime KG is a better defender, rebounder, and play-maker, but the ultimate goal is winning.

The rings are what keep Duncan ahead.

[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.

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?

No, I think the Spurs w/KG would've been contenders, too, but would've probably done some things differently with the rest of the team to win it all.  KG can anchor a championship defense, but not a title-level offense.  Duncan can do both; edge to Timmy.

Yes, KG can be a #1 option, easily, and was, in Minny, and they were what they were.

I didn't intend to "knock" anyone for anything, but just stated a case, based on my own analysis and Roy's numbers (thanks again, Roy), that Duncan is a better basketball player than KG.  It isn't my fault that basketball includes both offense and defense, or that players (unlike Football) have to play both, and consequently also not my fault that both, as equal parts of the game, get equal weight in evaluating the better basketball player.

Who's the better defensive player?  KG is, IMHO, but that's a different question.

[2short]

ugh what a question!
tim duncan but he's not on our team

[Who]

I think the Spurs would have been slightly worse with KG than with Duncan and missed out on their 2003 Championship.

I think the Wolves would have been a lot more successful with Duncan than with Garnett because Duncan is an easier player to build around. A more traditional center. A player who you can run your offense through in the low post. And a player who would be more readily used as a center which would have given the Wolves more options in acquiring other bigs.

[Eja117]

TD by a very wide margin

I find this sort of like one of those questions that are really obvious

I find it similar to MJ or Karl Malone

or Peyton vs Brady

[jdub1660]

KG all day. Not just b/c he's my favorite player, but KG was always on a sorry team. And when better players were put around him, he made it happen in his MVP season with Sam and Spree. I still say that if Troy Hudson, Wally and Spree were all healthy, that the WFC would have gone the other way that year, and the Twolves would have beat Detroit.

Don't let me take anything away from Timmy, but KG is better 1 on 1 and in mostly every category.

[GreenFaith1819]

Well, I haven't had a clear-cut pick yet, so I am going with Kevin Garnett.

Defense Wins Championships, and he brought that back to us. Man - another ring certainly seals the deal here.

I Know..my Green-Colored Glasses are obstructing the fact that Timmy has more rings, but right now I'm fine with that, because the Celtics have more Banners.

And KG helped in that regard. And he's not done I don't think.

[GreenFaith1819]

Oh - and TP to guachi for the thread..this one will probably go on for a day or so.

[drza44]

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.

The stats argument is a bit deceptive, because of the high school vs college issue.  Garnett and Duncan were born a month apart in the same year, and I think it perfectly valid to compare their numbers during the time both have been in the league (in other words, that KG was "struggling" relatively speaking during the time when Duncan was in college seems irrelevant to the question of whose career was better). 

So, since Duncan entered the league in '97, here are their averages:

Duncan: 21.4 points, 51% FG, 69% FT, 11.7 reb, 3.2 asts, 2.4 blocks, .8 steals, 2.8 TOs, 37 min/game

Garnett: 21.3 points, 50% FG, 79% FT, 11.8 reb, 4.6 asts, 1.6 blocks, 1.4 steals, 2.6 TOs, 38 min/game

I'm a big advocate of advanced stats, but even if you just keep it simple and look at their box score stats for the past 12 years it is very evident that they were very similar statistical players.  If someone thinks Duncan is better I respect it, and would have fun debating it, but the "Duncan's stats are better" argument is pretty weak, on top of not really being accurate.

[ManUp]

or Peyton vs Brady

Brady?

It's not obvious to me.

[drza44]

On-topic, I vote Garnett.  I think there was a time early in their careers when Duncan may have been slightly better, as his polish and veteran team seemed to get him up to speed very quickly.  But in 2002 KG upped his game a notch to a level that I believe to be slightly higher than Duncan ever reached at their peaks.  Also, pre-injury KG was aging better than Duncan as he remained an impact defender while Duncan has slid more noticeably at that end of the court.

This is one of my favorite sports debates, and I welcome the chance to go more in-depth if anyone else wants to really get into the nitty-gritty of it.  I've always maintained that Duncan vs KG was always meant to be the Bird vs Magic for this generation, and it sucks that they've never had the teams to compete against each other at the same time.

[pearljammer10]

Clearly Tim Duncan by a long shot. Like Roy said, Duncan was a winner since he came into the league. Great leader, and just made everyone around him better. He has played consistently throughout his career, always has his team in the playoff hunt, and has won what...4 rings?

Garnett was a stat machine in his prime, but he could never lead the team or bring his team to success. He needed two other all stars along side him to finally get deep in the playoffs and win a championship. He could never do it by himself...Duncan can, and has.
Duncan is just a better fit for any team, one on one however? It would be a close matchup.

[BudweiserCeltic]

Clearly Tim Duncan by a long shot. Like Roy said, Duncan was a winner since he came into the league. Great leader, and just made everyone around him better. He has played consistently throughout his career, always has his team in the playoff hunt, and has won what...4 rings?

Garnett was a stat machine in his prime, but he could never lead the team or bring his team to success. He needed two other all stars along side him to finally get deep in the playoffs and win a championship. He could never do it by himself...Duncan can, and has.
Duncan is just a better fit for any team, one on one however? It would be a close matchup.

I guess Robinson, Parker, Ginobili were nobodies? Finley...

When has Duncan done it again?

[DavorCroatiaFan]

How about head to head stats?
37 games: Duncan wins 21, KG 16 games. But with Celtics KG wins 3 of 4. Tomorrow will be 4 of 5.So teammates matters. If someone thinks that KG, Robinson, Parker and Ginobili wouldn't won titles...
In their head to head battles:
DUNCAN: 20,4ppg (46%fg,64%ft), 12,1rpg, 3,4apg, 1,9bpg, 0,5spg
GARNETT:21,0ppg (45%fg,78%ft), 11,3rpg, 4,5apg, 2,1bpg, 1,5spg

Duncan's best game vs KG 36pts,20reb,7ast
KG's best game vs Duncan 24pts,21reb,6ast,4blk

Some likes Tim, some KG. But its not Tim by a large margin...No way.

[Celtics17]

Before KG came here I would have said Duncan every time. The thing is though now that I have seen Kevin play more it's a really tough call. As someone said earlier, winning is what it's all about. Then though you have to examine their teammates. Whoever said that KG would need to a couple of other all stars may have been right. However, Duncan did have two others and Robinson was one of them. KG would have been absolutely dominating playing next to Robinson. Comparing players is a little like trying to compare different time periods, it's very difficult to do. While Timmy D is a very cerebral player KG can be too but in a different way. At this point in time I would take a healthy KG over Duncan for sure.