Boston Celtics: Kevin Garnett Shouldn't Retire to Further Cement His Legacy
However, that decision should be limited to whether or not KG will be returning to Boston or whether or not we will be seeing him in another uniform during the 2012-13 season.
Sure, Garnett will turn 37 years old next season and has a ton of mileage on his legs, but retirement should be the last thing on KG’s mind at the moment, as he can cement his legacy even further by returning for at least one more season.
Just looking at the season Garnett is coming off of in which he averaged 15.8 points and 8.2 rebounds—or the Celtics postseason run in which he averaged 19.2 points and 10.4 rebounds—you come away with a guy who despite his age, can still play the game at a very high level.
When Doc Rivers moved KG to the five in the middle of the season, it added another year—possibly two—to the career of Garnett. With KG’s ability to stretch the defense, very few centers can match up well with him on a nightly basis.
While his legacy is already set in stone as one of the greatest power forwards to ever play the game, his place will be even better historically if Garnett wins a second ring.
Make no mistake about it: if it’s not Boston, KG can help a contender win a title.
What should KG do?
He doesn’t have to play 30 minutes a night or average a double-double. His leadership alone can help a good team get over the hump.
Garnett is likely to take his time making a decision, which puts the Celtics in a bad spot; but while Garnett ponders his decision, several factors will go into it—including pride.
No athlete wants to go out seeing his skills drop, but I don’t believe that to be the case with KG.
He showed the world in the postseason that he still has a lot left to offer. If he decides to return and captures another championship, his legacy will be even further cemented as one of the greatest big men in NBA history.
Follow Matt Shetler on Twitter for news, reaction and analysis from around the NBA.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?