Author's Note: Before you read this, understand I am from Boston, and I am a big-time Celtics fan. I am going to try and back up my reasoning with actual facts and legitimate points, but being from the Bean, I may be inherently biased. For that I apologize.
Here we go again. I am sick and tired of listening to pundits and bloggers alike shred Kevin Garnett for what is a perceived inability to take over in the fourth quarter. He missed three free-throws at the back end of Game 5, certainly not great, but is that supposed to leave an indelible mark on his NBA history?
Too many people are concerned with history—how the 2008 season stacks up, how Kobe Bryant will leave his mark, and whether the Big Three can break through, but everyone seems to forget that Garnett has been just as good his entire life in the playoffs as he has in the regular season.
Critics point to his previous monumental failures in past postseasons, his inability to escape the first round for so many years with Minnesota, his lack of a killer instinct. But when you look carefully, you see this guy is a fantastic crunch time player, and one of the best power forwards to ever live, regardless of whether he wins this championship.
Look back at the past winners of the NBA championship and their star players.
Tim Duncan had Manu Ginobili and Tony Parker on his team for all except one his world championships, the one exception being when he had David Robinson...nuff said.
Rasheed Wallace had defensive player of the year Ben Wallace and two other All-Stars in Richard Hamilton and Chauncey Billups.
Dwayne Wade had Shaquille O'Neal. Sure he was a little past his prime, but he was still Shaq, and he still averaged 20 and nine.
Michael Jordan had Scottie Pippen, another member of the NBA's 50 greatest players.
Magic Johnson had James Worthy, Larry Bird had Kevin McHale, Bill Russell had Sam Jones and John Havlicek, and Wilt Chamberlain had Jerry West and Elgin Baylor.
My point is that players, even dominant superstars, can not be expected to win an NBA championship on their own. It's just not possible. Yet time and time again I hear Garnett taking the blame for the postseason failures of the Timberwolves.
Even in Minnesota's best season in 2003-04 when they made it all the way to the Western Conference Finals, the best second option Garnett had was Sam Cassell or Latrell Sprewell.
Remember back to those days—the "weak-minded, unable to finish" Kevin Garnett practically took the entire team on his back against a better Sacramento Kings team, and willed the Timberwolves into the Western Conference Finals on the strength of his performance in Game 7 that made grown men all over Minnesota and Sacramento weep.
KG Game 7: 32 points, 21 rebounds, two assists, four steals, five blocks, and 52 percent from the field.
All of this while holding Chris Webber to 16 points and eight rebounds.
Also keep in mind that against the Lakers Cassell was lost to the T'Wolves in Game 3 and didn't play for the rest of the series, and still Garnett forced a Game 6.
Now he is playing with better teammates, and his attitude, drive, and of course his play have helped push the Celtics to the brink of an NBA championship.
I concede that Garnett is not the same player that he was in 2003-04. He settles for too many fall away jump shots against a defender (Gasol) he should be abusing with quickness and strength.
He still has the tendency to pass off an open look when the team would be better served if he took it to the hoop. Also he occasionally loses confidence in his jump shot (attn: Game 3) and passes up open looks he would never have done earlier in his career.
However, he is still one of the greatest performers, postseason or not, of our generation.
His career postseason statistics match up well with that of Tim Duncan, who everybody knows as the winner of four NBA titles.
Garnett: 21.6 pts, 12.3 rbs, 4.4 assts, 47 percent from the field, 1.3 blocks
Duncan: 23.4 pts, 12.7 rbs, 3.5 assts, 50 percent from the field, 2.4 blocks
It's true that Duncan's stats do have the slight edge, but you would be crazy to think that the Spurs wouldn't have won those titles if they had swapped Duncan for Garnett.
Now fast forward to 2008, and see that Garnett is up from 18 points and nine rebounds a game, and is now closer to 21 points and 10 rebounds a game.
Remind me again how a guy can come in third in the MVP voting, improve his statistics in the postseason, and now become some sort of crunch-time pariah who everyone expects to fail.
The guy is not A-Rod. A-Rod's statistics in his past three postseasons have been a shell of his regular seasons and he is cast as a choke-artist. Garnett has improved his numbers, and he gets the same treatment.
It's one thing for someone to take a close look at how Garnett has played in postseasons past and then judge him based on his body of work.
But Garnett should be frustrated that all he has done in the playoffs is be the model of consistency, defend the rim, score in bunches, and lead all rebounders yet still be looked at as someone who doesn't have that killer instinct.
They aren't researching they are just drumming up stories.
A big Game 6 and an NBA Championship should silence his critics and cement his status among the greatest basketball players of our generation.
A bad Game 6 and epic defeats in Games 6 and 7 would only make his critics more vociferous, despite the fact that "The Big Ticket" has always performed on the NBA's biggest stage.
So here's hoping the Celtics close it out in Game 6. Not just for my selfish reasons as a Celtics fan and a Garnett fan, but so that one of the greatest forwards ever to lace up the high-tops gets his credit where credit is due.
comments (9) write a comment »
write a new comment
4 months ago
No sorry, Garnett does not deserve a free pass simply because you want him to get one. You mention that Garnett is a fantastic crunch time player, please name me instances of clutch play? He's had one game out of five in the Finals where he delivered, that isn't good enough.
Dwayne Wade won a championship with too-old, too-slow, defenseless players. Shaq was washed up in the Finals and shut down by Dasagna Diop. The rest of his team was comprised of Udonis Haslem, James Posey, and a slew of flawed role players. Wade LIFTED his team on his back, like Paul Pierce is doing, and won a fricken championship.
When Tim Duncan is on the court, he always has an impact because he'll draw double teams in the post. Duncan doesn't make himself a non-factor by shooting jump shots and picking up brainless fouls. And Duncan did a much better job defending Pau Gasol that Kevin Garnett has. Garnett's even been pushed around by the paper thin Gasol near the basket.
If Boston wins this championship and KG gets his ring, he'll be very fortunate to have ridden on the coattails of Paul Pierce's incredible series, James Posey's defense, and Ray Allen's clutch shooting.
Garnett wasted Pierce's Game 5, just like he's wasted his own talents for over a decade.
What exactly is Kevin Garnett's legacy besides that of a good (but overrated) defender, a terrific jump shooter, an overrated passer and playmaker, a cream puff, and a mental loser?
from 4 months ago
Yikes, clearly have issues with Garnett, I will try to respond to what you have said by compartmentalizing your comment.
"He's had one game out of five in the Finals where he delivered, that isn't good enough."
Well he certainly wasn't very good in Game 3, I'll give you that much. But he is still the only player in the NBA Finals who has had a double double in every single game, including game 3 where he went for 13 and 12.
In the 4th quarter of Game 5 he may have missed a tip that I would go ahead and say is not a gimme by any means, and 2 big free throws. He also hauled in 7 rebounds, including 3 offensive rebounds in the final quarter alone!! That's called giving his team a chance to win. Paul Pierce wouldn't have had all the opportunities he did if Garnett was still abusing Gasol underneath.
"Dwayne Wade won a championship with too-old, too-slow, defenseless players. Shaq was washed up in the Finals and shut down by Dasagna Diop. The rest of his team was comprised of Udonis Haslem, James Posey, and a slew of flawed role players."
You have got to be kidding me!! Do your research dude, Shaq averaged 19 and 9 for the playoffs, and averaged 14 and 10 in the Finals certainly not his best but no slouch either. Shut down by Diop???? He shot 60% from the floor for the series, thats some pretty great defense by Diop.
You also must remember that Dwayne Wade is able to get to the basket so easily in that series because he has a teammate in the middle of the paint that Dallas absolutely cannot leave unguarded.
I bet if you ask Dwayne Wade he would attribute a lot of his easy buckets to playing alongside Shaq. You think the same can be said for Latrell Sprewell or Sam Cassell when Garnett was in the playoffs with the Wolves? No way.
"When Tim Duncan is on the court, he always has an impact because he'll draw double teams in the post. Duncan doesn't make himself a non-factor by shooting jump shots and picking up brainless fouls. And Duncan did a much better job defending Pau Gasol that Kevin Garnett has. Garnett's even been pushed around by the paper thin Gasol near the basket."
Erick, I know you have watched every minute of the finals just as I have, so how can you possibly say Tim Duncan draws double teams and neglect to mention that Garnett is double-teamed 90% of the time by either Kobe or Odom, and when he is left alone he abuses Gasol. He makes just as big a difference if not more because he is such an effective passer from the low-post.
Duncan is a good passer from the post also, but not like Garnett.
As far as doing a better job guarding Gasol its pretty much a toss-up. Through 5 games Gasol is averaging 15 against the Celtics, and 14 against the Spurs, and the rebounding numbers are very similar too, how do you account for Duncan letting Gasol grab 19 rebounds in game 5, Garnett never would have let that happen.
Also, Perkins has been guarding Gasol quite a bit as well when he is on the floor, and Garnett was responsible for Lamar Odom in Games 1-4 who we can both agree was a non-factor if you exclude the 1st half of Game 4.
"If Boston wins this championship and KG gets his ring, he'll be very fortunate to have ridden on the coattails of Paul Pierce's incredible series, James Posey's defense, and Ray Allen's clutch shooting. "
Paul Pierce's incredible series...fine, I obviously have no problem with that it's obvious if the Celtics win Pierce should get MVP-------James Posey's defense...well ok, but he hasn't been asked to guard Kobe as much this series. That duty has fallen on Ray Allen and Paul Pierce for the most part, leaving Posey to cover Vujacic and occasionally Odom. He has played great defense sure, but thats not the reason the Celtics will win a title.--------Ray Allen's clutch shooting...No way, he went 4-13 in Game 5, and just 2-6 from downtown in Game 4. He has certainly played better, but Garnett helped carry the team past everyone else when Ray Allen was nowhere to be found, so I think Allen should thank Garnett if he gets a ring instead of vice versa.
"Garnett wasted Pierce's Game 5, just like he's wasted his own talents for over a decade."
The first part is ho-hum. Sure Garnett didn't play well and Pierce was a stud, most people picked the Lakers to win Game 5, now the Celtics have two games at home so they still have the advantage.
But wasting his talent for over a DECADE!!! C'mon, I cannot sit idly by and watch you diss one of the greatest forwards of our generation. He is one of the only players in history that is in the top 70 all-time in every major category ever recorded.
According to basketball-reference.com. he is 31st all-time in points scored (Tim Duncan is 58th), 68th all-time in assists (Tim Duncan is not on the list), 25th all-time in rebounds (Tim Duncan is 33rd), 41st all-time in steals (ahead of Kobe, Duncan again not on the list), 23rd all-time in blocks (Duncan is 15th), and 12th all-time in John Hollinger's PER (Duncan is 7th)
Duncan has more championships because he has played for a better team, with a better coach, better management, and better ownership. He and Garnett are practically statistically equal except Garnett is clearly a more well-rounded player and Duncan has played 2 fewer seasons, which is worth noting, but really just goes to show how equal they are as players.
The best way to measure a player is by his statistics, there is no other way to quantify his importance on the game.
"What exactly is Kevin Garnett's legacy besides that of a good (but overrated) defender, a terrific jump shooter, an overrated passer and playmaker, a cream puff, and a mental loser?"
Overrated defender...he has been elected to 9 consecutive all-defensive teams, twice he was 2nd team, the rest he was 1st team. I would say you can't judge him based on this year, but then again he was defensive player of the year.
Terrific Jump shooter...yeah he is good, but it sounds like you are talking about Glen Rice, Garnett has slowed with age, and now he is a jump shooter, before when he was younger and more flexible he rattled rims with ridiculous dunks and overpowered players.
Overrated Passer and Playmaker...Well let's see, the only power forward or centers who are higher on the list than Garnett in career assists are Kareem, who played 20 seasons, and Wilt, who played 15 and is less than 300 assists in front of Garnett, meaning Garnett can and most likely will pass him right around the same time Wilt finished.
A cream puff...I think we can all agree that Garnett is incredibly tough considering he has missed only 31 games in his entire career if you don't count 1998-1999 where he was legitimately injured. No one in the league wants to win more than Garnett.
A mental loser...I don't even want to justify it, I think you should know that that is walking on thin ice right there, they don't come much more mentally focussed or prepared than KG. I don't know how you get mental loser from 2 bad games
from 3 months ago
The Celtics have other good rebounders, they need his post offense more than his rebounding. Plus, where were his big rebounds late in games? You mentioned his 7 rebounds, yeah and he juggled one with under a minute to go that gave the Lakers a critical extra possession.
He missed three big free throws, not two. If he wanted to give his team the best chance, he hits those three.
Most of Pierce's baskets came when Garnett wasn't underneath but was setting screens for Pierce on the perimeter. Pau Gasol wasn't under the basket, and if the Lakers actually funneled Pierce into Gasol's help as they were supposed to, Pierce wouldn't have so many unimpeded layups.
I don't care what Shaq does in the first 2 rounds against pathetic teams, and a Detroit team that's been arrogant and cocky since Larry Brown left. Shaq had no impact on that series, whatsoever. He averaged over 3 turnovers a game, was in foul trouble throughout, played terrible defense, and was held well below his season, playoff, and career averages. Do your research instead of giving inflated stats like FG%. Since all Shaq shoots are layups, that means Shaq missed 40% of his layup attempts.
And what do you mean leave unguarded? Wade drives, Diop moves up, helpers drop down and rotate. That would be awful defense if Wade drove, and Diop let him shoot layups. And why not bring help off of Udonis Haslem with Dirk if you're concerned about Shaq under the basket? Trust me, it's far from impossible. The Bulls seemed to figure it out all right last season.
He does frequently get doubled which is why he ALWAYS should get to the post! If you can have an impact like that, why do you neglect it? Garnett is a good passer from the post, but if you believe that Duncan is only a good passer from the post, or that KG is a better post passer than Duncan, you haven't been paying any attention to the Spurs the past few years.
Gasol had a great Game 5 with those 19 boards (9 offensive). Of course, Duncan had 19, 15, and 10 in that game, and averaged almost 18 boards a game during the Conference Finals while Gasol averaged less than 8 in Games 1-4. If the Spurs had hit their jumpers or the Lakers hadn't played exceptional defense on Manu Ginobili, then Garnett's flaws would look even more pronounced against Tim Duncan.
Garnett's defense has been an asset all series. I won't deny that.
I was willing to continue debating your points until I read that Garnett was "clearly a more well-rounded" player. Besides handling in the open court and being a better perimeter defender because of better quickness, what, exactly, can Garnett do that Duncan doesn't do in spectacular fashion on a regular basis?
3 months ago
Well I would first like to say that its much easier for me to debate this now that Garnett showed up for a crucial game 6 and put an exclamation point on a great season.
But I will go straight to the bottom part...
I propose to you a match-up game to see who you think is better Duncan or Garnett, and I think we will see that they are pretty even except that Garnett plays better farther away from the basket than Duncan does.
Offensively----
Inside Scoring: Duncan
I will agree that nobody his size and at his position is better at finding ways to score on the low block than Duncan. Garnett is faster, but is much more inclined to take fall away jumpers than score from the blocks
Outside Scoring: Garnett
Partially because he is a little weaker and a little more agile, Garnett is far and away a better player from 15 feet and out. Duncan is a lot better than people give him credit for from that distance (witness his Game 1 three-pointer vs. Suns) but even you have to agree that Garnett can shoot jumpers, and take a slower man off the dribble much better than Duncan can.
Free Throws: Garnett
Whatever, this category is almost useless, but it does show that Garnett is a better free throw shooter by almost 12 percentage points (78%-67%). In the grand scheme of things it really doesn't matter and most likely just is another example that Garnett is better farther away from the basket.
Passing: Garnett
Don't get me wrong, Tim Duncan is an excellent passer from the post and anywhere else on the court. He is also an incredibly intelligent decision-maker and will rarely force a pass. But Garnett is just as good and better at all of things I mentioned. He has averaged more assists and less turnovers than Duncan for his career. Not by very much, but he has better numbers in both categories.
Defensively---
Rebounding: Push
Duncan may be a little better down the low, and his career rebounding numbers are just slightly better than Garnett's, but I hope you will agree that these two have been two of the best rebounders in the NBA since their inception and it seems to me that they are pretty much equal defensively. Duncan abused Gasol except in Game 5, but so did Garnett except for Game 5. It's safe to say this category is a push
Shot-blocking: Duncan
I will say it again just so you don't misconstrue anything. Duncan is a better interior player, offensively and defensively. He blocks more shots than Garnett despite lesser athleticism. His wingspan his tremendous and his help defense is a testament to his basketball intelligence.
Interior Defense: Duncan
He is bigger and stronger than Garnett is. Where as Garnett is a good defender on the low blocks, Duncan is a great defender on the low blocks because he gives up much less ground to the big guys than Garnett would.
Perimeter Defense: Garnett
As you said in your remarks up top, Garnett is more athletic and quicker so he is a better perimeter defender, able to guard tweeners like Lamar Odom, because essentially Garnett is just a bigger and stronger tweener. Duncan is serviceable, but as you know he is slower than Garnett and would most likely have a tough time not fouling Lamar Odom if Odom took him off the dribble.
In conclusion----
I only compare Garnett to Duncan because I have always viewed Duncan as the pinnacle of success for power forwards. He has won championships, and has made an enormous impact on each one of them. The reason I compare them is because I think when you look at it, these guys are extremely equal. Duncan has a slight edge down low, and Garnett is more athletic and able to stretch the defense. The only reason Garnett has never been put in the same category as Tim is because he never had the elusive title to add to his resume.
But, I believe it is not about how much better Duncan is in the postseason that has won him the championships, but rather his supporting cast. He has been surrounded by almost two all-stars, and a lockdown defender almost every year he has won the title.
In your response you even support this claim by saying
"If the Spurs had hit their jumpers or the Lakers hadn't played exceptional defense on Manu Ginobili"
Duncan can't do it by himself, just like Garnett could never do it by himself when his best teammates were a good but not great Sam Cassell and a 30-something Latrell Spreewell. I don't think Garnett has folded in the playoffs ever, and that was the point of my article, I just think he didn't have any support.
from 3 months ago
Duncan has gotten it done in the past with flawed supporting casts though. In 99, Sean Eliott was an average wing player, and Avery Johnson was little more than a smart point guard who didn't make mistakes. David Robinson was on the team, but the Spurs didn't have much else.
In 2003, Tony Parker was more reckless than he is today, as was Manu Ginobili. Neither was an elite player yet. Robinson was fading quickly, and Duncan still led the team to a championship.
As a franchise player, Garnett's always had to be the guy who's had to have the ball in his hands late in games, and he never had the mentality to go out and score to win games. And he's always made mistakes. Your role is different if you don't have too many other offensive players on your team.
And Garnett has had decent teammates. Trent Hassell was an outstanding defender, Spreewell was a two-way player, Sam Cassell could always score, Wally Szczerbiak could shoot.
Look at how Kobe has scored in the 4th quarter of the Western Conference Playoffs. Look at how LeBron has played, and Wade before that. Look at Pierce from Game 7 vs Cleveland on. Wade from 2006, Shaq and Duncan during the Spurs and Lakers dynasties, etc.
I'm not punishing Garnett for never winning a championship before, because I do know that Garnett's never had championship level teammates...but he should have been out of the first round more than once in his career but never stepped in the playoffs.
Just like he didn't step up in the Finals until last night.
Still, he had a redeeming Game 6 which more than made up for his terrible Game 6. Crunch time was early for the Celtics yesterday and KG produced. Props to him.
I give credit to Duncan because of his ability to ALWAYS make the right plays in big games, and he's succeeded infinitely more times than he's failed.
I'd go so far as to say KG is a better individual defender than Duncan because players can turn and face on TD, and TD's length is only above average. No big man in our generation is a better help defender than Duncan, and as good as KG is, Duncan is probably the best passing big man of our generation by always recognizing where the open man is.
from 3 months ago
If you look at his teammates in his career, he really never should have been out of the 1st round except for the one year he did get out. Look at his playoff career.
1996-1997: Best Teammates were Tom Gugliotta and Stephon Marbury. This was Garnett and Marbury's second season in the league so it's tough to fault them.
1997-1998: Same best teammates. This is a season they probably should have made it out. But they got beat by a decent SuperSonics team 3-2
1998-1999: Best Teammates were Marbury and Terrell Brandon, whom not only play the same position but really aren't that good.
1999-2000: Best Teammates were Brandon and Szcerbiak. Szcerbiak only averaged 11 points a game, Brandon was old.
2000-2001: Same Best Teammates. They were only marginally better, maybe could have made it out, but the team wasn't really that good
You get the point, the Western Conference has been stacked, and players like Szcerbiak and Terrell Brandon and a young Stephon Marbury aren't not championship caliber teammates.
You also need to keep in mind that Spreewell and Cassell only played in Minnesota for 2 years. The first year was when KG finally broke through with actual teammates, like you said, and they played for the Western Conference Championship against a dynastic Lakers team and without Cassell after Game 3.
Then, they missed the playoffs the following year in Cassell and Spree's last season with the Wolves, but Cassell only played in 59 games that year, and Spreewell's scoring average dropped nearly five points.
Also know that in 2003, the Spurs also had an emerging Stephen Jackson and a surprisingly good Malik Rose, who averaged double figures. You are right that Duncan carried that team.
But I would rather take a young Tony Parker, an aging hall-of-famer, and a young supporting cast than any teammates Garnett ever had in Minnesota except maybe when he had Cassell and Spreewell. It's unfortunate that they didn't meet up that year because that would have been fun to watch and would have been an excellent barometer of who was better.
regardless, I think we can both agree now that KG has cemented his legacy alongside Duncan as the best power forwards of our generation and that they are both equal hall of fame candidates.
As a matter of fact, basketball-reference.com both gives them a 100% for their chances of reaching the hall of fame. The only other 3 are Shaquille O'Neal, Kobe, and Allen Iverson....pretty good company
3 months ago
Don't understand why you didn't mention Robert Parrish and Dennis Johnson when you talk about Bird. I hope that was just an oversight!
from 3 months ago
I mean you could easily throw more people on the list for Magic Johnson too, such as byron scott but I was just using the names for effect. Of course Bird got plenty of help from Parrish and DJ, i just didn't think it was worth mentioning.
3 months ago
Duncan is the greatest power forward to play the game, period. Garnett is probably in the top five to seven. I disagree that Garnett isn't clutch, it's just that he's clutch on the defensive end. If you watch the games closely you can see that when he isn't talking to himself, he's quarterbacking the defense by making sure people are in the right position, and calling out adjustments.
Duncan is more of an individual force, meaning that he is the last line of defense, and can score at will when he gets the ball in the right place. He isn't really creating offense for anyone else, so much as distorting the other teams defense by being such a force in the post. He is the very best at his position, and has been for a long time.
Garnett is more team oriented, meaning that he keeps the offense moving with his unbelievable passing ability and vision, he spreads the floor with his fantastic outside shooting, and his overall defense is amazing as he can guard just about anyone on the floor in most situations. He also possesses one of the most lethal combinations of height, length, and speed that the NBA has ever seen. Because of this athleticism, he has never had to strictly rely on a traditional back to the basket post game, even though you see it on occasion.
But in my opinion, the biggest reason why he isn't considered "clutch" as most believe he should be is because he exerts all of his energy on defense similar to the way Bill Russell did, because they both believe that defensive excellence is the only thing you can control with any measure of consistency. Garnett's defensive intensity is second to none in the NBA, and that intensity has spread to everyone else in the locker room.
Duncan is the greatest power forward in the game, but he can't affect the very mentality of a team in the way that Kevin Garnett has this year. Without Garnett's intensity, they wouldn't have been nearly as great a defensive team even with Tom Thibodeau's schemes.
I mean, when is the last time you saw Ray Allen play defense like he did throughout the playoffs??? When a twelve year veteran who is known for playing matador defense his entire career, all of a sudden exerts the effort that Allen did this season to play outstanding defense? That says something right there, doesn't it?
write a new comment