Yes or No? McHale better than Garnett?

[Mr Green]

Being able to watch McHale in his prime is a major reason why I ended up falling in love with the Cs, but if I had to pick between him and KG, I'd have to go with KG. Reason being that KG is the man on his team, while McHale was arguably viewed as playing on 'Larry's team'.

Horrible question though, it's like being asked to pick between your two flesh and blood children as to which one is your favorite!

[slamtheking]

At his peak, McHale had the "misfortune" of playing next to a top-5 player all-time.  If KG played next to Bird, he never would have won an MVP, either.

If KG played next to Bird with both at their peaks, I could see Bird being seen as better because of the Yay Points! theory, but KG actually having the better season.

By some measures, KG at his peak was at least as good as Bird at his peak.   If you like Win Shares as one of the better single-number stats, KG has two seasons with more win shares than Bird's best and three seasons with a higher WS48 than Bird's best.  I think PER is inferior to win shares, but Garnett has two seasons with a PER higher than Bird's best.

I think Garnett at his peak is a heck of a lot closer to peak Bird than peak McHale in terms of value.

it's not too often I read something on the forums that makes me go "what's he smoking?" but this is one of those comments.

Just curious, did you ever actually see Bird play?  At Larry's peak, the question wasn't whether he was the best in the league but whether he was the best of all time.  KG, despite a HOF-quality career, doesn't even get into that level of discussion.  seriously.

Look who KG beat out for his MVP.  His stiffest competition was Tim Duncan, Kobe and Shaq.  all-time great players to be sure but Larry was winning his MVPs against Magic in his prime, Jordan when he was starting out and already carrying the Bulls on his back, Moses Malone, Bernard King, Sidney Moncrief (a great yet unsung player in those days), Dominique, etc...   All players that were great talents and far superior to what passed for the "cream of the crop" in KG's MVP year.

[Junkyard Dawg]

it's not too often I read something on the forums that makes me go "what's he smoking?" but this is one of those comments.

Just curious, did you ever actually see Bird play?  At Larry's peak, the question wasn't whether he was the best in the league but whether he was the best of all time.  KG, despite a HOF-quality career, doesn't even get into that level of discussion.  seriously.

Look who KG beat out for his MVP.  His stiffest competition was Tim Duncan, Kobe and Shaq.  all-time great players to be sure but Larry was winning his MVPs against Magic in his prime, Jordan when he was starting out and already carrying the Bulls on his back, Moses Malone, Bernard King, Sidney Moncrief (a great yet unsung player in those days), Dominique, etc...   All players that were great talents and far superior to what passed for the "cream of the crop" in KG's MVP year.

It's not too often that I see someone ask "what is this guy smoking?" and I legitimately wonder "what is this other guy smoking?"

You're seriously gonna compare Duncan, Shaq and Kobe to Sidney Moncrief and Bernard King? 

Now look I'm not gonna weigh in on this debate, I haven't watched enough 80s Celtics basketball.  But I know the sky is blue.  And I know that this is one of the most ridiculous statements I've ever read.

[KeepBigAl]

the thing about McHale is that is post moves were so unique and historic....there was no one in the league with those skills until Olajuwon developed....and there is not a single player in the league today with these skills.


KG may have racked up more stats as an indiviual player to give him an overall edge, but there are many other players in his mold (athletic, jumpshooting bigs), so he is not a 'special' a player in my eyes.

[Fafnir]

it's not too often I read something on the forums that makes me go "what's he smoking?" but this is one of those comments.

Just curious, did you ever actually see Bird play?  At Larry's peak, the question wasn't whether he was the best in the league but whether he was the best of all time.  KG, despite a HOF-quality career, doesn't even get into that level of discussion.  seriously.

Look who KG beat out for his MVP.  His stiffest competition was Tim Duncan, Kobe and Shaq.  all-time great players to be sure but Larry was winning his MVPs against Magic in his prime, Jordan when he was starting out and already carrying the Bulls on his back, Moses Malone, Bernard King, Sidney Moncrief (a great yet unsung player in those days), Dominique, etc...   All players that were great talents and far superior to what passed for the "cream of the crop" in KG's MVP year.

It's not too often that I see someone ask "what is this guy smoking?" and I legitimately wonder "what is this other guy smoking?"

You're seriously gonna compare Duncan, Shaq and Kobe to Sidney Moncrief and Bernard King? 

Now look I'm not gonna weigh in on this debate, I haven't watched enough 80s Celtics basketball.  But I know the sky is blue.  And I know that this is one of the most ridiculous statements I've ever read.

Yeah I'm with you on that, Larry/Magic/Michael I get that train of thought.

But saying Bernard King makes Tim Duncan look like bad competition  .

[Fafnir]

the thing about McHale is that is post moves were so unique and historic....there was no one in the league with those skills until Olajuwon developed....and there is not a single player in the league today with these skills.


KG may have racked up more stats as an indiviual player to give him an overall edge, but there are many other players in his mold (athletic, jumpshooting bigs), so he is not a 'special' a player in my eyes.

I don't know about that. I can name more players in the mold of McHale (elite low post scorer) than KG's. Sure you get guys like Al Harrington who fill the same "athletic shooter" if you want to call KG that, but they're not in the same class.

KG was special because he could do pretty much everything on the court as a seven footer. McHale was special because of his ability to score, just different skillsets. (and neither was "awful" in other areas, another thing that is important, elite guys in a single area are easy to find but ones that are well rounded not so much)

[More Banners]

I'd say, overall, no.  KG is better overall.

I'll give the standard answer, McHale had the better post moves and overall offensive game.  But it's close.

McHale was a good defender, but KG is in my book the 2nd best defender all-time.  Only Russell is ahead.

I've been a huge, huge McHale fan since I can remember.  He's pretty high on my all-time fav Celtics.  He was amazing with the ball, an underrated and quick passer, and an excellent defender, too. 

They're both great in the locker room, though completely opposite.  [imagine a practical joke by KG...]

But KG is truly an all-time defender, and that distinction makes the difference.  There are many ways to score, but to play near-flawless defense...priceless.

But it hurts me to not vote for McHale!

[Fafnir]

But it hurts me to not vote for McHale!

They were in such different situations too. McHale played for a stacked team and his peak was short before injuries took him down several notches.

KG had no help until 07-08 and was a horse until he was 32, never missing games.

[LooseCannon]

At his peak, McHale had the "misfortune" of playing next to a top-5 player all-time.  If KG played next to Bird, he never would have won an MVP, either.

If KG played next to Bird with both at their peaks, I could see Bird being seen as better because of the Yay Points! theory, but KG actually having the better season.

By some measures, KG at his peak was at least as good as Bird at his peak.   If you like Win Shares as one of the better single-number stats, KG has two seasons with more win shares than Bird's best and three seasons with a higher WS48 than Bird's best.  I think PER is inferior to win shares, but Garnett has two seasons with a PER higher than Bird's best.

I think Garnett at his peak is a heck of a lot closer to peak Bird than peak McHale in terms of value.

it's not too often I read something on the forums that makes me go "what's he smoking?" but this is one of those comments.

Just curious, did you ever actually see Bird play?  At Larry's peak, the question wasn't whether he was the best in the league but whether he was the best of all time.  KG, despite a HOF-quality career, doesn't even get into that level of discussion.  seriously.

Look who KG beat out for his MVP.  His stiffest competition was Tim Duncan, Kobe and Shaq.  all-time great players to be sure but Larry was winning his MVPs against Magic in his prime, Jordan when he was starting out and already carrying the Bulls on his back, Moses Malone, Bernard King, Sidney Moncrief (a great yet unsung player in those days), Dominique, etc...   All players that were great talents and far superior to what passed for the "cream of the crop" in KG's MVP year.

Yes, I did see Bird play (on TV), but I also know that sometimes your eyes deceive you.

I can't believe we are having a discussion about KG vs McHale.  People are either underrating Garnett or overrating McHale, probably the latter because they are massively overvaluing post scoring.  An aging Garnett in decline was still performing at a HOF level last season.  Garnett has a longer, better peak and has a significantly longer career.  McHale's main advantage is in having better teammates during his peak.

If we were ranking all-time power forwards, I think I would put Garnett ahead of not just McHale but also Karl Malone and Charles Barkley.

[Moranis]

I believe McHale had the makeup to be a #1 go to player, something I just don't think was in Garnett's makeup.  But Garnett was a better all around player.  So if I was starting a team and had the choice between either guy I might very well take McHale as a #1 guy, but most likely would go with the better player who was Garnett.

[BballTim]

At his peak, McHale had the "misfortune" of playing next to a top-5 player all-time.  If KG played next to Bird, he never would have won an MVP, either.

If KG played next to Bird with both at their peaks, I could see Bird being seen as better because of the Yay Points! theory, but KG actually having the better season.

By some measures, KG at his peak was at least as good as Bird at his peak.   If you like Win Shares as one of the better single-number stats, KG has two seasons with more win shares than Bird's best and three seasons with a higher WS48 than Bird's best.  I think PER is inferior to win shares, but Garnett has two seasons with a PER higher than Bird's best.

I think Garnett at his peak is a heck of a lot closer to peak Bird than peak McHale in terms of value.

it's not too often I read something on the forums that makes me go "what's he smoking?" but this is one of those comments.

Just curious, did you ever actually see Bird play?  At Larry's peak, the question wasn't whether he was the best in the league but whether he was the best of all time.  KG, despite a HOF-quality career, doesn't even get into that level of discussion.  seriously.

Look who KG beat out for his MVP.  His stiffest competition was Tim Duncan, Kobe and Shaq.  all-time great players to be sure but Larry was winning his MVPs against Magic in his prime, Jordan when he was starting out and already carrying the Bulls on his back, Moses Malone, Bernard King, Sidney Moncrief (a great yet unsung player in those days), Dominique, etc...   All players that were great talents and far superior to what passed for the "cream of the crop" in KG's MVP year.

Yes, I did see Bird play (on TV), but I also know that sometimes your eyes deceive you.

I can't believe we are having a discussion about KG vs McHale.  People are either underrating Garnett or overrating McHale, probably the latter because they are massively overvaluing post scoring.  An aging Garnett in decline was still performing at a HOF level last season.  Garnett has a longer, better peak and has a significantly longer career.  McHale's main advantage is in having better teammates during his peak.

If we were ranking all-time power forwards, I think I would put Garnett ahead of not just McHale but also Karl Malone and Charles Barkley.

  Garnett is a better player than McHale was but he's closer to a McHale level player than a Bird level player. As someone mentioned, people spent much of Larry's career talking about whether he was the best player of all time. KG's rarely if ever mentioned in those terms.

[slamtheking]

At his peak, McHale had the "misfortune" of playing next to a top-5 player all-time.  If KG played next to Bird, he never would have won an MVP, either.

If KG played next to Bird with both at their peaks, I could see Bird being seen as better because of the Yay Points! theory, but KG actually having the better season.

By some measures, KG at his peak was at least as good as Bird at his peak.   If you like Win Shares as one of the better single-number stats, KG has two seasons with more win shares than Bird's best and three seasons with a higher WS48 than Bird's best.  I think PER is inferior to win shares, but Garnett has two seasons with a PER higher than Bird's best.

I think Garnett at his peak is a heck of a lot closer to peak Bird than peak McHale in terms of value.

it's not too often I read something on the forums that makes me go "what's he smoking?" but this is one of those comments.

Just curious, did you ever actually see Bird play?  At Larry's peak, the question wasn't whether he was the best in the league but whether he was the best of all time.  KG, despite a HOF-quality career, doesn't even get into that level of discussion.  seriously.

Look who KG beat out for his MVP.  His stiffest competition was Tim Duncan, Kobe and Shaq.  all-time great players to be sure but Larry was winning his MVPs against Magic in his prime, Jordan when he was starting out and already carrying the Bulls on his back, Moses Malone, Bernard King, Sidney Moncrief (a great yet unsung player in those days), Dominique, etc...   All players that were great talents and far superior to what passed for the "cream of the crop" in KG's MVP year.

Yes, I did see Bird play (on TV), but I also know that sometimes your eyes deceive you.

I can't believe we are having a discussion about KG vs McHale.  People are either underrating Garnett or overrating McHale, probably the latter because they are massively overvaluing post scoring.  An aging Garnett in decline was still performing at a HOF level last season.  Garnett has a longer, better peak and has a significantly longer career.  McHale's main advantage is in having better teammates during his peak.

If we were ranking all-time power forwards, I think I would put Garnett ahead of not just McHale but also Karl Malone and Charles Barkley.

  Garnett is a better player than McHale was but he's closer to a McHale level player than a Bird level player. As someone mentioned, people spent much of Larry's career talking about whether he was the best player of all time. KG's rarely if ever mentioned in those terms.

thanks--that was my point.  I didn't weigh in on the Mchale/KG debate, just responded to the off-topic statement comparing KG to Bird. 

At their peaks, KG is probably a bit better based on his rebounding and passing.  I think that's the only way they can really be compared fairly since Mchale broke his foot in the run to the '87 title and was never really the same afterwards. 

[LooseCannon]

Garnett belongs in the discussion for the top ten players of all time.  McHale doesn't.  Garnett has a legitimate argument for being considered when you talk about the greatest power forward of all-time.  As far as I am concerned, among players who have spent at least part of their career in a Celtics uniform, the only guys who can argue that they were better than KG are Bird and Russell.

People don't talk about Garnett as much as they should because he spent his peak with the non-contending T-Wolves.  If he is rarely mentioned when people talk about all-time greats, it's because people are wrong, not because Garnett is undeserving.

[blastoidesroidsnoids]

At his peak, McHale had the "misfortune" of playing next to a top-5 player all-time.  If KG played next to Bird, he never would have won an MVP, either.

If KG played next to Bird with both at their peaks, I could see Bird being seen as better because of the Yay Points! theory, but KG actually having the better season.

By some measures, KG at his peak was at least as good as Bird at his peak.   If you like Win Shares as one of the better single-number stats, KG has two seasons with more win shares than Bird's best and three seasons with a higher WS48 than Bird's best.  I think PER is inferior to win shares, but Garnett has two seasons with a PER higher than Bird's best.

I think Garnett at his peak is a heck of a lot closer to peak Bird than peak McHale in terms of value.

it's not too often I read something on the forums that makes me go "what's he smoking?" but this is one of those comments.

Just curious, did you ever actually see Bird play?  At Larry's peak, the question wasn't whether he was the best in the league but whether he was the best of all time.  KG, despite a HOF-quality career, doesn't even get into that level of discussion.  seriously.

Look who KG beat out for his MVP.  His stiffest competition was Tim Duncan, Kobe and Shaq.  all-time great players to be sure but Larry was winning his MVPs against Magic in his prime, Jordan when he was starting out and already carrying the Bulls on his back, Moses Malone, Bernard King, Sidney Moncrief (a great yet unsung player in those days), Dominique, etc...   All players that were great talents and far superior to what passed for the "cream of the crop" in KG's MVP year.

Yes, I did see Bird play (on TV), but I also know that sometimes your eyes deceive you.

I can't believe we are having a discussion about KG vs McHale.  People are either underrating Garnett or overrating McHale, probably the latter because they are massively overvaluing post scoring.  An aging Garnett in decline was still performing at a HOF level last season.  Garnett has a longer, better peak and has a significantly longer career.  McHale's main advantage is in having better teammates during his peak.

If we were ranking all-time power forwards, I think I would put Garnett ahead of not just McHale but also Karl Malone and Charles Barkley.

easily. For that matter I'd put him at #1 PF of all time

[slamtheking]

it's not too often I read something on the forums that makes me go "what's he smoking?" but this is one of those comments.

Just curious, did you ever actually see Bird play?  At Larry's peak, the question wasn't whether he was the best in the league but whether he was the best of all time.  KG, despite a HOF-quality career, doesn't even get into that level of discussion.  seriously.

Look who KG beat out for his MVP.  His stiffest competition was Tim Duncan, Kobe and Shaq.  all-time great players to be sure but Larry was winning his MVPs against Magic in his prime, Jordan when he was starting out and already carrying the Bulls on his back, Moses Malone, Bernard King, Sidney Moncrief (a great yet unsung player in those days), Dominique, etc...   All players that were great talents and far superior to what passed for the "cream of the crop" in KG's MVP year.

It's not too often that I see someone ask "what is this guy smoking?" and I legitimately wonder "what is this other guy smoking?"

You're seriously gonna compare Duncan, Shaq and Kobe to Sidney Moncrief and Bernard King? 

Now look I'm not gonna weigh in on this debate, I haven't watched enough 80s Celtics basketball.  But I know the sky is blue.  And I know that this is one of the most ridiculous statements I've ever read.

Yeah I'm with you on that, Larry/Magic/Michael I get that train of thought.

But saying Bernard King makes Tim Duncan look like bad competition  .

that's not what I said.  I credited Timmy with being top competition.  The rest of the MVP candidates at that time, not so much. 
Besides, Bernard King was just amazing to watch before his knee injuries.  MVP candidate back in the day.  Not as good of an all-around player as Timmy but he was scoring like Jordan before Jordan.