Wolves vs Spurs?

[Riot]

I'm not saying Sam isn't an all-star. I'm saying he hasn't been an all-star until he played with Kevin Garnett. Wally Szczerbiak isn't all-star caliber but anyways he was hurt the past 2 years

Latrell is a streaky guy who one night can get 30 then the next 4 games get a total of 10. Latrell isn't all-star caliber anymore, don't even try to convince me otherwise.

What I mean when I say Kevin Garnett does more for the team meaning we put so much responabilty on him. We are a horrible rebounding team, worset in the league without Kevin Garnett. We put all the pressure on KG to rebound, ALL OF IT. SO when he goes out, we often get creamed on the boards. Which is why having David Robinson helps.

Also, KG is our help defense, our anchor, our offensive weapon, he is our "true" point guard. If Parker and Ward went down last year, would Duncan be able to play Point Guard for the Spurs? Would he have been able to basically play two positions at once (PG and PF)? Kevin is more valuable and to say he isn't as good as Duncan is a joke. They play different games.

If they took a stat of how many altered shots every player makes then Kevin would be leading the league every year. This year he improved his block shots but he always is contesting shots and altering them. I'm not saying Duncan doesn't, but KG"s atheltism allows him to.

And who said Duncan is smarter than Garnett? Garnett is a very, very smart basketball player. His Basketball IQ is very high and everyone who watchs him who atleast knows a little bit about basketball sees it.

I'm a Timberwolves fan. But I think Kevin Garnett is better than Tim Duncan. I think Spurs are better than the Wolves. Biased? Maybe. But you guys are plain ignorant to think Kevin Garnett isn't even on the level of Tim Duncan.

Some people would even push to say Duncan isn't even top 3 in the league. I'm not saying he is but lot's of fans seem to think Tim Duncan is overrated. I don't think he is but some people do.

It's an opinion factor but I'm not here hating on Tim. I'm not saying Tim isn't in Kevin's league. But you guys who are saying Kevin can't touch Duncan or whatever, you guys are idiots.

[The Game]

Latrell is a streaky guy who one night can get 30 then the next 4 games get a total of 10

lets pretend i agree with you on that, so is Ginobili and Bowen.

What I mean when I say Kevin Garnett does more for the team meaning we put so much responabilty on him

so does the spurs to Duncan

We are a horrible rebounding team, worset in the league without Kevin Garnett

again, so is the spurs without duncan

Which is why having David Robinson helps

do you still remember how David Robinson played in his last season?

If they took a stat of how many altered shots every player makes then Kevin would be leading the league every year

no, Ben Wallace would be leading that

I'm a Timberwolves fan. But I think Kevin Garnett is better than Tim Duncan. I think Spurs are better than the Wolves. Biased? Maybe. But you guys are plain ignorant to think Kevin Garnett isn't even on the level of Tim Duncan

Garnett is good and so is Duncan. who is better? if we base it on stats, it might very well be a tie. base it on success? Duncan.

It's an opinion factor but I'm not here hating on Tim. I'm not saying Tim isn't in Kevin's league. But you guys who are saying Kevin can't touch Duncan or whatever, you guys are idiots

[Riot]

Ben Wallace doesn't alter as many shots as Kevin Garnett. I'm sorry.

[Carlos Boozer]

His Basketball IQ is very high and everyone who watchs him who atleast knows a little bit about basketball sees it.

What the??

LOw baskteballIQ.com @garnett
He shoots bricks..
Duncan=succes
KG-first round

[Riot]

You can't judge KG because he didn't get out of the first round. How about how he got the Wolevs the #4 seed in the West two years ago with Wally hurt most of the year?

Rasho-KG-Gill-Peeler-Hudson

That was our lineup most of the year. That's impressive. Yet we got to face the lakers. Bummer.

Anyways, if all you are going to do is point out Duncan 2 rings-KG 0 then this agrument has no purpose. You can rant and rave over titles but the bottomline is neither of these guy's careers are over. KG could win 3 in a row now and would that make him better than Duncan?

Titles separate teams. Not players.

[The Game]

How about how he got the Wolevs the #4 seed in the West two years ago with Wally hurt most of the year?

and duncan won a title with David Robinson hurt for most of the year.
this was their lineup: Duncan, Rose, Bowen, Ginobili, Parker.

That's impressive

regualar season impressive but not playoff impressive. and guess what? the playoffs matter more.

Titles separate teams. Not players.

exactly. so the spurs are better than the twolves

[magius]

considering duncan is a back to back mvp and a two time champion and playoff mvp, i consider anyone who considers him overrated mentally retarted and abused as a fetus. I don't care if you can do everything, I don't care if you can play point, centre, power forward. I don't care. That's secondary. What do I care about? a championship. Duncan has one Garnett doesn't. All minnesota fans do is whine and make excuses. Oh, we dont have good players. bam, bam, cassell, spree. ooooh, hudson and cassell are injured. boo fucking hoo. to me a great player isnt individually great, but molds his team into his persona and sticks to a system and plan and wins. There are plenty of crap teams team usa played in the olympics, and although one might say they are individually much more talented they still had a hard time. Basketball is a team game, and superstars who play through the team and not the other way around are legendary. kg may be more "individually talented", whatever that means, but duncans a winner, and that in my book, makes him better. Go ahead and wait till next season, but right now, today, duncans a champion, garnett isnt, plain and simple; this argument isnt any argument at all.

scerbiaks only an all star because of garnett? bowens only a first team defense, and dpoy candidate because of duncan.

[Riot]

Duncan made Bowen.
KG made Hassell.

Plain and simple. I don't think it's right to judge players by titles because some aren't put in winning situations. Patrick Ewing must be a loser then huh? How about Barkley? You're career isn't a loss without a title.

[magius]

well, literally, yes, ewing and barkley are losers, because, well, they didnt win, i'm not of the school where a bronze medal is as good as gold. I didnt say they were bad players mind you, i think they are both very good, but i do not consider them great, because great players are made in the finals. they are losers, but their careers werent a loss, because they earned a lot of money and had good individual success.

your career isnt made great without a title in my book. hassell? oh was he the secret dpoy candidate? 13th man on the all defense team? i'm sorry, i wasnt priivy to this information.

great players create winning situations. simple and plain.

[Riot]

Wolves are winners just not champions.

[magius]

my definition of winning isnt a good regular season record and the playoffs. maybe yours is, but mine isnt. There isnt any middle ground for me in this matter, the nba only has one champioin, one winner, every year. No one remembers second or third place.

[Riot]

It's like the olympics. Silver Medal is always good. Bronze is too. being a winner and being a champion are different. Champions are better but you can win without winning the big one.

[Sauru]

calling barkley and ewing losers is just stupid. only reason these teams are winning titles now is cause the nba is weaker. put any of the teams now in the 80's and early 90's and they would not win anything. put a barkley at his prime in this nba and he is the mvp. same goes for ewing. sometimes great players dont win it all cause they never had a good enough team. then sometimes a great player cant win it all cause they run into a even greater player(read:Jordan). the reason dominique never got anywhere was cause he had to go through boston phily and detroit. those teams were just a hell of alot better, and sadly cause of that he was not even named one of the 50 greatest(though they gave shaq the nod after just comeing into the league?). can anyone sit here and say that barry sanders was only a ok running back cause he never won a ring or even made it to the superbowl? anyone that tries to say that would be an idiot as he is in my mind the second best back in football history, maybe first(sorry for jumping sports).

i am not even gonna argue kg vs duncan anymore as both are damn good. duncan got 2 rings vs KG's 0, so right now you gotta say duncan will be happier when his career ends. does this make him better? no, but it does make the spurs better. btw i read in this post that great players make thier teammates better. well i dont see duncan makeing the any of those players better. he draws the double constantly and they cant even hit the open J half the time(its why they lost). now should duncan or garnett have all the blame put on thier shoulders if certain teammates fail to perform at thier peak and they lose cause of it? some say no, i gotta go with yes. i say yes cause if you are gonna be called one of the very best in the nba you better make your teammates play better, and if they dont, you better throw them over your shoulder and drag thier sorry asses to a win.

[Riot]

Dan Marino (sp?) must suck too.

[Sauru]

good one, for some reason never entered my mind.

[-BHZMAFIA-]

Garnett is a better all-around player, while Duncan is a better post player. IMO, Duncan is a more dominate player than KG because KG is easier to stop from scoring. The fact is, KG doesn't post up alot and when you post up, you get a high percentage of shots. Duncan shot .501% from the field last season, while Garnett shot .499%. So you could say if Garnett went to the post more, he would shoot a better percentage than Duncan. When I looked at the minutes Duncan played, I was amazed at the fact he only played 36.6 mpg, while KG played 39.4. If Duncan was able to play as many minutes as KG then he would probably put up more points and rebounds. If Duncan can spread his range around and he can make FT's, then he would most likely be the best. Right now, I can't say who is better because you won't know until the end of their careers. Both players still have ALOT more time left in them so I won't say who is better. If I had to pick someone, it would be Duncan and that's because he is a more at will scorer than KG.

[magius]

The basis for someone with no basis behind his argument is always to create parallels to detract from the fact that in fact he doesnt have a direct basis to his argument. Dan the fuck marino? who's talking about dan marino??? Duncan and garnett are playing right now. Today. Look at the facts: 2 championships, 2 playoff mvps, back to back mvp vs 0 trips to the finals and one mvp and incredibly nice stats. Now, there are two types of basketball people: the ones that measure players by their individual success and the ones that understand pure basketball. The both of us think we're right, there is no right. But in my mind it is more likely that someone who calls another an idiot for thinking differently is the idiot themselves. You of course disagree. Go fuck a nut. In my mind, if your a great player there are no excuses. I emphasize GREAT. Great players make no excuses cuz they don't need excuses, they do, they win. Seems to me garnett has all the excuses in the world, but no answers. Oooooh, its easier to win nowadays!!! I understand noow! Therefore, garnett should have an even easier time of winning more championships......waitaminute....... HE DOESNT HAVE ANY.

If you think silver medals okay, good for you, I myself prefer gold.

barkley and ewing are losers, I don't mean it in a bad way, but they are losers when it comes to winning. Understand? comprehende? Player no win champy, player no win, player lose, player = loser. Making excuses for things that are done, and are fact, and bumbling "uh if, uh if, uh if" is hilarious from my perspective. What if, what if, what if. Why the fuck would i worry about what if when we have what is right in front of us.

You know how i know duncan makes his teammates better? well, uh, duncans teammates have two rings on their fingers. Championship teams dont win with superstars that don't make their teammates better, bubba.

Now you guys are gonna go around whining "oh all you got is he has more rings, nah nah nah". The fuck right I am -- If it isnt about the fucking rings what is it about? The only feasible evidence that defines a better player is WINNING. no, not making it to the second round. winning the championship. what the fuck is any professional sport about, but plain and simple, winning and maybe having fun doing it? Duncan has accomplished the #1 goal, the purpose and the basis of any professional competitive sport team out there. Garnett hasnt. Who's better, the guy who made it, or the guy that almost made it.

Garnett = great player. duncan = greater player. As of today. I never said either one was bad, I never said ewing or barkley were bad, I never said anyone sucked, I just see at it is and put each and each in their rightful place.

[Riot]

Sam Cassell and Mark Madsen are beter than Karl Malone and John Stockton?

[The Game]

Sam Cassell and Mark Madsen are beter than Karl Malone and John Stockton?

maybe...

[Riot]

WHat I mean is...


mark madsen is a better winner than Karl Malone? Sam better winner than John?

I don't think so.

[magius]

mark madsen and sam cassell werent the playoff mvps now were they? dig through all my past posts ever about defining great players, and you see i clearly say that GREAT players almost always have 3 things: championship, PLAYOFF mvp, and mvp. and besides, we're comparing obvious team focuses so don't give me the steve kerr routine.

of current players still playing only tim duncan and shaqille o'neal can reasonably be considered and/or mentioned within the same breadth as the hakeems and wilts and jordans. kg may do that one day, but no one knows that, what we do know without a doubt is that kg hasnt as of today.

[Jackal]

Duncan made Bowen.
KG made Hassell.

Please, spare me. Hassell was an ok defender while he was with the Bulls, KG didn't do squat. It's just that people are actually watching him in games since Wolves games are publicisized and all of a sudden he's some great defender? Please.

Hehe, KG made Hassell.

of current players still playing only tim duncan and shaqille o'neal can reasonably be considered and/or mentioned within the same breadth as the hakeems and wilts and jordans.

Make a note of it, I love this man.

[Sauru]

ok magius, answer me this. if winning is everything then is bill russel the greatest basketball player ever?

[TRIO DOROBO]

Better change this thread to Duncan Vs. Garnett HA HA HA

KG? Duncan? Can we also include the Lazy Shaq plssssssss......

[Sauru]

shaq got more rings he is clearly better.