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.