CelticsStrong

Celtics Basketball => Celtics Talk => Topic started by: ManUp on March 07, 2013, 11:38:10 PM

Title: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: ManUp on March 07, 2013, 11:38:10 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uylc-uTDKtU (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uylc-uTDKtU)

Skip Bayless is an idiot... that is all.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: CelticConcourse on March 07, 2013, 11:44:13 PM
Don't even listen to him. Waste of time.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: Boris Badenov on March 07, 2013, 11:57:07 PM
The fact that Bayless starts out by focusing on KG's offensive abilities proves his ignorance.

KG has a legitimate place in discussions about who is the greatest defensive player in NBA history. I'm not saying I think he is the best, but he is up there. I think his ability to elevate the abilities of those around him on defense is the best in NBA history. (Though, I never saw Russell play.)

Add that to his terrific scoring, rebounding and passing skills, along with his commitment to winning and team play, and you have one of the most complete players on both ends of the floor the league has ever seen.

Silly.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: jdz101 on March 07, 2013, 11:58:11 PM
I saw Stephen A. Smith's face and decided not to click play.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: mgent on March 08, 2013, 12:06:21 AM
If that's the way you see it then Kevin Garnett IS in fact an all-time great 2 guard in a PF's body.  He'll never be seen an all-time great in the paint, but he was much better than those guys at passing, ball-handling, and jump-shooting.  You play to your strengths.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: ManUp on March 08, 2013, 12:22:41 AM
IMO, the battle for the title of greatest power forward of all-time is between KG and Duncan. KG in his prime was a monster. 22 points, 13 rebounds, 5 assists, a block, and a steal nightly (combined with game changing defense). IMO, it doesn't matter how you play the game as long as your effective and KG was pretty [dang] effective.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: timobusa on March 08, 2013, 12:31:41 AM
If that's the way you see it then Kevin Garnett IS in fact an all-time great 2 guard in a PF's body.  He'll never be seen an all-time great in the paint, but he was much better than those guys at passing, ball-handling, and jump-shooting.  You play to your strengths.

This! I agree that KG is a Big 2 guard. And we look at him and say, wow this guy was made to play basketball. But what most/SKIP doesn't see is that transformation from 2 to 5, not many players can say they have done that heck, he can play the point in his early days. Not many players can guard the 1 to 5 spot exceptionally like KG does.

He was not built to be a 5, but he is playing to his strengths. His intensity and passion and knowledge for the game is unreal. I'd say he is the most versatile player this game has ever seen. He has his own category in the record books for crying out loud.

Started out as a 2, played the 3 in his early years, excelled at the 4, and now finishing his career as a 5. He is an All-Time Great. Period.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: Smutzy#9 on March 08, 2013, 12:37:25 AM
My Reply

Name me another player that has 25000 points 10000 rebounds 5000 assists almost 2000 blocks and over 1000 steals......


OH THATS RIGHT... THERE ISNT ANY!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Man is in a league of his own.

Factor in the way he makes those around him play harder, and the way he anchors a defence.

You have an all time great there
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: raynman on March 08, 2013, 01:49:48 AM
I saw Stephen A. Smith's face and decided not to click play.

TP, bro!  ;D
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: raynman on March 08, 2013, 02:35:41 AM
My Reply

Name me another player that has 25000 points 10000 rebounds 5000 assists almost 2000 blocks and over 1000 steals......


OH THATS RIGHT... THERE ISNT ANY!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Man is in a league of his own.

Factor in the way he makes those around him play harder, and the way he anchors a defence.

You have an all time great there

... END OF DISCUSSION!  Skip Bayless can S*** it!
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: Celtic Fan Forever on March 08, 2013, 03:13:57 AM
How Skip Bayless has a job seems to baffle me every time he speaks.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: LooseCannon on March 08, 2013, 03:17:01 AM
Skip Bayless complains that KG shoots to many jumpers and that bigs should score more of their points in the paint.  I think that one of the great things about KG is that he is a big able to score so many points outside the paint without being an indiscriminate chucker.  He is what I look for in a power forward or center, a great defender who has to be defended out to the perimeter.  He's a better player than someone who would score the same amount of points, but only by posting up and pounding the ball inside and not through a more varied offense.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: Bahku on March 08, 2013, 03:38:43 AM
I just can give no weight or import to anything Skip "Way-Less" Bayless says ... he's one of those people my minds shuts off every time it hears his voice.

I guess he's allowed an opinion like the rest of us, it's just sad that he's able to spread it around so far-and-wide, (he and Felger should hook up ... two-of-a-kind).
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: celticsleyte on March 08, 2013, 04:06:57 AM
IMO, the battle for the title of greatest power forward of all-time is between KG and Duncan. KG in his prime was a monster. 22 points, 13 rebounds, 5 assists, a block, and a steal nightly (combined with game changing defense). IMO, it doesn't matter how you play the game as long as your effective and KG was pretty [dang] effective.

The way Kevin McHale is overlooked around here is something else.  He was a great on both ends of the floor and was regularly abusing people before he lost his lift by playing through ridiculous injuries in the playoffs.  He could D up nearly everyone (not so much Kareems sky hook) and score in the post on anybody.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: celticsleyte on March 08, 2013, 04:39:40 AM
As far as ESPN commentary, of course KG is an all time great.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: Scottie on March 08, 2013, 04:49:28 AM
So Bayliss is marking down KG for not being the player that HE wanted him to be.....makes sense :o
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: Yoki_IsTheName on March 08, 2013, 04:53:50 AM
I don't know. I'm reading in to what Skip said I think he agrees that KG is an all time great, he just thinks he could've been great-er if he played like a big and scored down low.

He's been calling him Kevin Gar-not before, ever since Cold Pizza days, not because of disrespect but because he believes KG has the skills and the tools to dominate down low but still he'd rather shoot jumpers. It's the same as him calling out LeBron when he was shooting fade away jumpers a ton, and Skip is calling him out, telling him that he's unstoppable when driving the lane so he should but instead he's choosing to chuck fade aways.

This is just me. I read Skip's comments as KG is an All Time Great, he could've have been Greater though if he scored and utilized his skills in the post more.

Call me crazy if you want, but I agree with Skip, in that sense of course. I think KG in his prime drifted a lot and fell in love with the jumpers. He may not be as strong as SAS said, but the KG I've seen before had an array of moves and he could easily dominate the paint because he's long and shifty. But I guess Skip and I are picking knits here. But KG is All Time great, definitely.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: Moranis on March 08, 2013, 06:32:13 AM
My Reply

Name me another player that has 25000 points 10000 rebounds 5000 assists almost 2000 blocks and over 1000 steals......


OH THATS RIGHT... THERE ISNT ANY!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Man is in a league of his own.

Factor in the way he makes those around him play harder, and the way he anchors a defence.

You have an all time great there
Kareem exceeds all of those by a fairly wide margin.  Olajuwon far exceeds all of those except assists.  And Malone is the reverse on steals and blocks with nearly 37000 points, just under 15000 rebounds, over 5200 assists, over 2000 steals, and over 1100 blocks. 
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: Onslaught on March 08, 2013, 06:46:30 AM
IMO, the battle for the title of greatest power forward of all-time is between KG and Duncan.
Dirk Nowitzki
Elvin Hayes
Kevin McHale
Charles Barkley
Karl Malone


With names like that I'd have to argue that it's more then just KG and Duncan battling for the GOAT. Duncan probably is the top one overall however.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: SHAQATTACK on March 08, 2013, 07:08:35 AM
yup, he is one of those rare iconic sports figures that everybody knows , like Shaq, or Barkley.   

He must retire a Celtic.

Pierce maybe a better player and greater in Celtic fans eyes  , but KG is like Santa Claus , everybody knows him the world over.

KG is just plain cool.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: Josh88 on March 08, 2013, 07:17:03 AM
I didn't watch the video because I have zero respect for either of those two, but of course KG is an all-time great. I can't believe it's even debatable. I've been a huge fan of his game long before he ended up in Boston.

He dominated the game in every way in his prime. He's a 7 footer who averaged over 5 assists a game for 6 straight seasons, and over 4 for 10 straight seasons. He regularly took the ball down the court for the Timberwolves and handled playmaking duties. Saying a player can play all 5 positions or guard all 5 positions is overused these days, but in his prime he truly was capable of that.

In my opinion he's the single most versatile and complete player ever. Yes, there are many players shorter than him who also had no holes in their game; but he's 7 feet tall and was still capable of doing everything at an elite level aside from 3 point shooting. His stats in his MVP season are just mind boggling. 24 ppg, 14 rpg, 5 apg, 2.2 bpg, 1.5 spg on 50% FG and 79% FT. Just ridiculous, it doesn't get any more complete than that. Stats can't possibly do his defense justice either.

It's a shame that the best years of his career were wasted in Minnesota on bad teams. The most help he had there was Latrell Sprewell and Sam Cassell well past their primes; that's pretty bad. Duncan is a hell of a player too and I don't want to take anything away from him, but look at the talent the Spurs have had every year since he's been there. I truly believe if KG had had that strong of a team every season he'd have a handful of rings too. He really is loyal to a fault.

Anyone who thinks he doesn't belong up there with the all-time greats just doesn't know what they're talking about. 15 time all-star, 9 all-nba selections, 12 all-defense selections, MVP, all-star game MVP, DPOTY, championship, his resume is as complete as any other PF's.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: scaryjerry on March 08, 2013, 07:19:19 AM
 ::)Folks...he could've been greater, his teams had missed the playoffs 3 years in a row   before he came here, they'd been out of the first round once. Yes individually and statistically he's an all time great...he's been fantastic as a Celtic....could've been better skip is right and for those who bash Stephen a without even watching it..um he takes the other side of the argument
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: Yoki_IsTheName on March 08, 2013, 07:44:55 AM
::)Folks...he could've been greater, his teams had missed the playoffs 3 years in a row   before he came here, they'd been out of the first round once. Yes individually and statistically he's an all time great...he's been fantastic as a Celtic....could've been better skip is right and for those who bash Stephen a without even watching it..um he takes the other side of the argument

agree here.

I think as crazy Skip is he knows for certain that KG is all time great. Must have just forgot to say it because he right away went to "could have been greater". But he has valid points. KG couldve have dominated the game more if he incorporated his low post skills along with his excellent midrange game. He'll be unstoppable. But he did at the tail end of his prime floated out a ton and just settled for jumpers. But no one, and I think Skip does not as well, is denying what he can bring. He just though he could be better.

And your points about missing the playoffs our being bounced in the first round is also correct. Although, he did not have a ton of help in Minny outside of that one year he had Cassell and that crazy coach choking dude.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: slamtheking on March 08, 2013, 08:01:21 AM
IMO, the battle for the title of greatest power forward of all-time is between KG and Duncan.
Dirk Nowitzki
Elvin Hayes
Kevin McHale
Charles Barkley
Karl Malone


With names like that I'd have to argue that it's more then just KG and Duncan battling for the GOAT. Duncan probably is the top one overall however.
Bird spent some time at PF as well.  Would include him in that discussion too even though he slid back and forth between the forward spots
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: Snakehead on March 08, 2013, 08:17:48 AM
I don't know. I'm reading in to what Skip said I think he agrees that KG is an all time great, he just thinks he could've been great-er if he played like a big and scored down low.


The issue with that is that's just not KG.  What KG is though is probably the most complete big man ever.  He can shoot, pass, block shots, rebound, attack the rim.... and is very smart and a great leader.  I know he doesn't have the post game of some others but he is a truly remarkable player.  To me he is a modern Russell in how he just fits into his team and makes his whole team better, with how his game adapts and how he brings leadership and fire.

I wouldn't take any PF over him.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: Boston Garden Leprechaun on March 08, 2013, 08:23:50 AM
yup, he is one of those rare iconic sports figures that everybody knows , like Shaq, or Barkley.   

He must retire a Celtic.

Pierce maybe a better player and greater in Celtic fans eyes  , but KG is like Santa Claus , everybody knows him the world over.

KG is just plain cool.

 8)
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: RebusRankin on March 08, 2013, 08:44:57 AM
Something like 7 years in a row of 20-5-10 per game. HOF Defense. Very good scorer. Elite rebounder. Above average passing for a big man. The question is not HOF worthy, the question is top 30 all-time?20? etc
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: sofutomygaha on March 08, 2013, 08:56:01 AM
I saw Stephen A. Smith's face and decided not to click play.

I hate to say this, because Stephen A. Smith is a friend of mine. Stephen A. Smith performed my son's briss. Stephen A. Smith and I own a timeshare together in Ogunquit with side-by-side clawfoot bathtubs overlooking the water.

but Stephen A. Smith is a complete boob and no one should ever take anything he says seriously ever. If I was in a crowded movie theater and Stephen A. Smith yelled "fire," I would sit tight and hope that at least it meant he was leaving.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: BballTim on March 08, 2013, 09:29:16 AM
Skip Bayless is an idiot... that is all.

  In other news, the sky is still blue.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: PierceMVP08 on March 08, 2013, 09:39:34 AM
This is the same network that had the headline "Add Stephen Curry to the list of greats who have scored over 50 points at MSG."

Yeah, Stephen Curry is a great but KG's status is up for debate.  I stopped watching ESPN aside from live NBA games a looooooooooooong time ago.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: Chelm on March 08, 2013, 09:40:36 AM
IMO, the battle for the title of greatest power forward of all-time is between KG and Duncan. KG in his prime was a monster. 22 points, 13 rebounds, 5 assists, a block, and a steal nightly (combined with game changing defense). IMO, it doesn't matter how you play the game as long as your effective and KG was pretty [dang] effective.

The way Kevin McHale is overlooked around here is something else.  He was a great on both ends of the floor and was regularly abusing people before he lost his lift by playing through ridiculous injuries in the playoffs.  He could D up nearly everyone (not so much Kareems sky hook) and score in the post on anybody.
No one could guard Kareem's sky hook.  Wouldn't really hold that against anyone.  I also wonder at people forgetting Karl Malone.  Yeah, he didn't win a championship, but he got [dang] close, and has the rest of the statistics to at least be in the conversation.  I mean, at KG's age he still averaged 26/10/4.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: Chelm on March 08, 2013, 09:50:02 AM
My Reply

Name me another player that has 25000 points 10000 rebounds 5000 assists almost 2000 blocks and over 1000 steals......


OH THATS RIGHT... THERE ISNT ANY!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Man is in a league of his own.

Factor in the way he makes those around him play harder, and the way he anchors a defence.

You have an all time great there
Look, I love KG, and he is definitely an all-time great, but if you're judging based on statistics, Malone had more of every stat except for blocks.  Plus, he had 3 years of college taking away from those totals.  I think it's a little disingenuous to say "there isn't any".
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: slamtheking on March 08, 2013, 10:14:40 AM
I saw Stephen A. Smith's face and decided not to click play.

I hate to say this, because Stephen A. Smith is a friend of mine. Stephen A. Smith performed my son's briss. Stephen A. Smith and I own a timeshare together in Ogunquit with side-by-side clawfoot bathtubs overlooking the water.

but Stephen A. Smith is a complete boob and no one should ever take anything he says seriously ever. If I was in a crowded movie theater and Stephen A. Smith yelled "fire," I would sit tight and hope that at least it meant he was leaving.
TP for the laugh.  still smiling over that one.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: BballTim on March 08, 2013, 10:20:08 AM
Something like 7 years in a row of 20-5-10 per game. HOF Defense. Very good scorer. Elite rebounder. Above average passing for a big man. The question is not HOF worthy, the question is top 30 all-time?20? etc

  You'd be pretty hard pressed to name 30 players better than KG. I'd probably go with top 20.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: rocknrollforyoursoul on March 08, 2013, 10:27:23 AM
This should not even be in question.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: Celtic on March 08, 2013, 10:37:06 AM
There really is no debate as to whether KG is an all time great. Before he came to the C's I thought he was the best player in the NBA for many years running and in all honesty in 2008 he was the rightful MVP. I believe that if KG had been drafted to a better team with a better GM he would have easily won multiple championships before Boston. Duncan is usually considered the player (at least the dominant big player) of that generation, I can't help but wonder if that would be true if their situations were reversed.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: CelticsFan9 on March 08, 2013, 10:44:34 AM
Let's look at his resume:

MVP, DPOY, champion, multiple All Stars, multiple All NBAs, multiple All Defenses

Then you look at his stats:

25,000 points, 10,000 rebounds, 5,000 assists, over 2,000 stocks (steals/blocks)

His legendary intensity and focus.  His desire to win while understanding a TEAM wins chips, not one player.  A great teammate, and an even greater player.

KG is the man, and he'll probably go down as my favorite player ever.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: GreenEnvy on March 08, 2013, 11:18:24 AM
IMO, the battle for the title of greatest power forward of all-time is between KG and Duncan. KG in his prime was a monster. 22 points, 13 rebounds, 5 assists, a block, and a steal nightly (combined with game changing defense). IMO, it doesn't matter how you play the game as long as your effective and KG was pretty [dang] effective.

The way Kevin McHale is overlooked around here is something else.  He was a great on both ends of the floor and was regularly abusing people before he lost his lift by playing through ridiculous injuries in the playoffs.  He could D up nearly everyone (not so much Kareems sky hook) and score in the post on anybody.
No one could guard Kareem's sky hook.  Wouldn't really hold that against anyone.  I also wonder at people forgetting Karl Malone.  Yeah, he didn't win a championship, but he got [dang] close, and has the rest of the statistics to at least be in the conversation.  I mean, at KG's age he still averaged 26/10/4.

Karl Malone was a great player for a long time, but along with never winning, he was the only one of the all-time great PF's to play alongside a PG of Stockton's stature.


I'd go with Duncan/KG as the two best. McHale 3rd. Barkley/Malone round out the top 5.


KG is, IMHO, one of the three greatest defensive players ever (EVER). His career statistics are already one-of-a-kind (25K points, 15K rebounds, 5K assists, 1.5K steals, 1.5K blocks). His versatility makes him a very unique player.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: Yoki_IsTheName on March 08, 2013, 11:46:16 AM
I don't know. I'm reading in to what Skip said I think he agrees that KG is an all time great, he just thinks he could've been great-er if he played like a big and scored down low.


The issue with that is that's just not KG.  What KG is though is probably the most complete big man ever.  He can shoot, pass, block shots, rebound, attack the rim.... and is very smart and a great leader.  I know he doesn't have the post game of some others but he is a truly remarkable player.  To me he is a modern Russell in how he just fits into his team and makes his whole team better, with how his game adapts and how he brings leadership and fire.

I wouldn't take any PF over him.

Stephen A. actually said the same thing, and I think that is Skip's point. He has the tools, the skills and the craftiness to be a low post scoring threat as well in addition to everything KG had. "He could have been greater is what Skip said. I don't think he's trying to imply that KG is not all time great, but he could be greater.

That is what I am agreeing on. I don't think Skip would say KG is not an All Time great, he would be ultra crazy for him not to say that. Although, I think he's saying KG could have at least jumped jumped up a few levels on the great scale if only he scored down low like a big man instead of floating around and shooting jumpers (which is not bad, don't get me wrong).
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: Roy H. on March 08, 2013, 11:51:22 AM
That's what you get for watching First Take.  From my experience, this is the level of "analysis" they show there daily.

Unless you define "all-time great" as being among the top 5 or 6 players ever, then of course KG is a historically great player.  He is a clear-cut top-five PF of all-time, and some would say the best PF ever (although I would disagree).
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: celtics2 on March 08, 2013, 11:57:52 AM
The fact that Bayless starts out by focusing on KG's offensive abilities proves his ignorance.

KG has a legitimate place in discussions about who is the greatest defensive player in NBA history. I'm not saying I think he is the best, but he is up there. I think his ability to elevate the abilities of those around him on defense is the best in NBA history. (Though, I never saw Russell play.)

Add that to his terrific scoring, rebounding and passing skills, along with his commitment to winning and team play, and you have one of the most complete players on both ends of the floor the league has ever seen.

Silly.

Another Great. Yes the League is pouring them out lately. I saw Russell play. I think KG may be coming off the bench back then. But today, hey he's up there, close enough by today's standards.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: KGs Knee on March 08, 2013, 12:08:13 PM
How is the the greatest PF of all-time not an all-time great?

Does their stupidity know no bounds?  Do thse guys even believe the words that come out of their own mouths, or do they just spew hyperbole, for the sake of being hyperbolic?
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: CelticConcourse on March 08, 2013, 12:09:30 PM
How is the the greatest PF of all-time not an all-time great?

Does their stupidity know no bounds?  Do thse guys even believe the words that come out of their own mouths, or do they just spew hyperbole, for the sake of being hyperbolic?

He's an all-time great 2. ;D
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: Yoki_IsTheName on March 08, 2013, 12:21:57 PM
How is the the greatest PF of all-time not an all-time great?

Does their stupidity know no bounds?  Do thse guys even believe the words that come out of their own mouths, or do they just spew hyperbole, for the sake of being hyperbolic?

No one from First Take said KG is not an All Time great. Skip just blabbed and said "he could have been great-er" but I've not heard any of the two said he's no All Time Great.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: Brendan on March 08, 2013, 12:30:13 PM
Duncan has been playing Center for a long time, KG has been mostly a PF. I think KG is the better PF on peak value and volume, but Duncan the better player, because being the primary offensive guy is the hardest part of the game, and KG didn't want that, and maybe couldn't be that.

McHale gets a serious discount in my opinion for his short peak and shorter career. I don't consider Barkley a great two way player, Dirk either. Pretty sure Malone was using steroids, so he's out, plus no ring.

It's too hard for me to say anything about the old(er) school guys.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: ManUp on March 08, 2013, 01:37:55 PM
IMO, the battle for the title of greatest power forward of all-time is between KG and Duncan. KG in his prime was a monster. 22 points, 13 rebounds, 5 assists, a block, and a steal nightly (combined with game changing defense). IMO, it doesn't matter how you play the game as long as your effective and KG was pretty [dang] effective.

The way Kevin McHale is overlooked around here is something else.  He was a great on both ends of the floor and was regularly abusing people before he lost his lift by playing through ridiculous injuries in the playoffs.  He could D up nearly everyone (not so much Kareems sky hook) and score in the post on anybody.
No one could guard Kareem's sky hook.  Wouldn't really hold that against anyone.  I also wonder at people forgetting Karl Malone.  Yeah, he didn't win a championship, but he got [dang] close, and has the rest of the statistics to at least be in the conversation.  I mean, at KG's age he still averaged 26/10/4.

Karl Malone was a great player for a long time, but along with never winning, he was the only one of the all-time great PF's to play alongside a PG of Stockton's stature.


I'd go with Duncan/KG as the two best. McHale 3rd. Barkley/Malone round out the top 5.


KG is, IMHO, one of the three greatest defensive players ever (EVER). His career statistics are already one-of-a-kind (25K points, 15K rebounds, 5K assists, 1.5K steals, 1.5K blocks). His versatility makes him a very unique player.

Pretty much how I see it.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: Who on March 08, 2013, 01:58:24 PM
IMO, the battle for the title of greatest power forward of all-time is between KG and Duncan. KG in his prime was a monster. 22 points, 13 rebounds, 5 assists, a block, and a steal nightly (combined with game changing defense). IMO, it doesn't matter how you play the game as long as your effective and KG was pretty [dang] effective.

The way Kevin McHale is overlooked around here is something else.  He was a great on both ends of the floor and was regularly abusing people before he lost his lift by playing through ridiculous injuries in the playoffs.  He could D up nearly everyone (not so much Kareems sky hook) and score in the post on anybody.
No one could guard Kareem's sky hook.  Wouldn't really hold that against anyone.  I also wonder at people forgetting Karl Malone.  Yeah, he didn't win a championship, but he got [dang] close, and has the rest of the statistics to at least be in the conversation.  I mean, at KG's age he still averaged 26/10/4.

Karl Malone was a great player for a long time, but along with never winning, he was the only one of the all-time great PF's to play alongside a PG of Stockton's stature.


I'd go with Duncan/KG as the two best. McHale 3rd. Barkley/Malone round out the top 5.


KG is, IMHO, one of the three greatest defensive players ever (EVER). His career statistics are already one-of-a-kind (25K points, 15K rebounds, 5K assists, 1.5K steals, 1.5K blocks). His versatility makes him a very unique player.

Top three, who are the other two?

I presume Bill Russell is one. Who is the other one?
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: KGs Knee on March 08, 2013, 02:31:51 PM
IMO, the battle for the title of greatest power forward of all-time is between KG and Duncan. KG in his prime was a monster. 22 points, 13 rebounds, 5 assists, a block, and a steal nightly (combined with game changing defense). IMO, it doesn't matter how you play the game as long as your effective and KG was pretty [dang] effective.

The way Kevin McHale is overlooked around here is something else.  He was a great on both ends of the floor and was regularly abusing people before he lost his lift by playing through ridiculous injuries in the playoffs.  He could D up nearly everyone (not so much Kareems sky hook) and score in the post on anybody.
No one could guard Kareem's sky hook.  Wouldn't really hold that against anyone.  I also wonder at people forgetting Karl Malone.  Yeah, he didn't win a championship, but he got [dang] close, and has the rest of the statistics to at least be in the conversation.  I mean, at KG's age he still averaged 26/10/4.

Karl Malone was a great player for a long time, but along with never winning, he was the only one of the all-time great PF's to play alongside a PG of Stockton's stature.


I'd go with Duncan/KG as the two best. McHale 3rd. Barkley/Malone round out the top 5.


KG is, IMHO, one of the three greatest defensive players ever (EVER). His career statistics are already one-of-a-kind (25K points, 15K rebounds, 5K assists, 1.5K steals, 1.5K blocks). His versatility makes him a very unique player.

Top three, who are the other two?

I presume Bill Russell is one. Who is the other one?

I don't think there is a top 3.  Russell and KG are just so far ahead of the rest of the pack.

However, if there was a top 3, I'd be inclined to give MJ serious consideration for the 3rd spot.  MJ's defense is often over-looked due to his prowess as a scorer.  He was an unbelievably good perimeter defender, though.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: DavorCroatiaFan on March 08, 2013, 02:37:10 PM
I believe in ten years folks will say: 3 best defensive players of all time- Russell, KG and Bradley  8)
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: nostar on March 08, 2013, 02:46:40 PM
Top three, who are the other two?

I presume Bill Russell is one. Who is the other one?

I think Gary Payton is somewhere in the mix as long as we're not talking defensive bigs.

I'm slightly more interested in the 1st team all-time trash-talkers though.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: Roy H. on March 08, 2013, 03:21:04 PM
IMO, the battle for the title of greatest power forward of all-time is between KG and Duncan. KG in his prime was a monster. 22 points, 13 rebounds, 5 assists, a block, and a steal nightly (combined with game changing defense). IMO, it doesn't matter how you play the game as long as your effective and KG was pretty [dang] effective.

The way Kevin McHale is overlooked around here is something else.  He was a great on both ends of the floor and was regularly abusing people before he lost his lift by playing through ridiculous injuries in the playoffs.  He could D up nearly everyone (not so much Kareems sky hook) and score in the post on anybody.
No one could guard Kareem's sky hook.  Wouldn't really hold that against anyone.  I also wonder at people forgetting Karl Malone.  Yeah, he didn't win a championship, but he got [dang] close, and has the rest of the statistics to at least be in the conversation.  I mean, at KG's age he still averaged 26/10/4.

Karl Malone was a great player for a long time, but along with never winning, he was the only one of the all-time great PF's to play alongside a PG of Stockton's stature.


I'd go with Duncan/KG as the two best. McHale 3rd. Barkley/Malone round out the top 5.


KG is, IMHO, one of the three greatest defensive players ever (EVER). His career statistics are already one-of-a-kind (25K points, 15K rebounds, 5K assists, 1.5K steals, 1.5K blocks). His versatility makes him a very unique player.

Top three, who are the other two?

I presume Bill Russell is one. Who is the other one?

I don't think there is a top 3.  Russell and KG are just so far ahead of the rest of the pack.

However, if there was a top 3, I'd be inclined to give MJ serious consideration for the 3rd spot.  MJ's defense is often over-looked due to his prowess as a scorer.  He was an unbelievably good perimeter defender, though.

I'm not sure that KG's defense was that head-and-shoulders above everyone else.  There have been a lot of great defensive players.  Just talking big men since 1980, you've got Hakeem, Dikembe, Ben Wallace.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: Onslaught on March 08, 2013, 03:30:48 PM
Duncan has been playing Center for a long time, KG has been mostly a PF. I think KG is the better PF on peak value and volume, but Duncan the better player, because being the primary offensive guy is the hardest part of the game, and KG didn't want that, and maybe couldn't be that.

McHale gets a serious discount in my opinion for his short peak and shorter career. I don't consider Barkley a great two way player, Dirk either. Pretty sure Malone was using steroids, so he's out, plus no ring.

It's too hard for me to say anything about the old(er) school guys.

It's not fair to judge Malone for not having a ring. KG never even sniffed a ring before coming to the Celtics and playing with two other future hall of fame players. And if you go by rings then Duncan is so far past KG that it's not even a contest. Even the Worm has KG smacked down in the ring department.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: alajet on March 08, 2013, 03:37:52 PM
He is. Stats aside, the way he played basketball on court made him one. He was one of the two dominant forces in his position for over a decade alongside Duncan.
Their styles looked different, personalities look different. Rings don't tell how great you were. That's all about competition. 
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: Onslaught on March 08, 2013, 03:53:20 PM
KG is a really good defender. For sure in the top 10 regardless of position. But I feel that some of you either didn't see or are forgetting some other people before him.


Gary Payton
Scottie Pippen
MJ
David Robinson
Sidney Moncrief
Dikembe Mutombo
Nate Thurmond
Tim Duncan
Dennis Rodman
Hakee Olajuwon



That's just off the top of my head and I'm sure I'm forgetting some other greats.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: GreenFaith1819 on March 08, 2013, 04:11:06 PM
At first, I was going to tear into Skip Bayless for this commentary, but decided not to.

Admittedly, I like most of his commentary...I think that him and Stephen A make a good combo.

As far as his commentary with KG? I don't think, sadly, that he fully understands what KG was called on to do in Minny.

Flip Saunders asked KG to play ALL 5 positions, sometimes...not because he or KG wanted to showboat, but because he HAD TO, and he knew that KG was talented, smart and experienced enough to do so.

See article:

http://espn.go.com/boston/nba/story/_/id/7868121/2012-nba-playoffs-kevin-garnett-transformation-skinny-sf-all-nba-pf-center-boston-celtics-looking-tough-out

Quote
Flip Saunders was desperate. The Minnesota Timberwolves' coach had lost his starting point guard during the 2004 Western Conference finals against the Lakers. His backup point guard was injured. Even a third point guard, imported from the CBA, was injured.

So who did Saunders decide should run the Minnesota offense?

Who else? Kevin Garnett. "It was him and Freddy Hoiberg. They were my point guards," Saunders said.


And what did Garnett take away from it all?

"It was the worst experience of my life," Garnett said. "But I have a lot of respect for the point guard position just because of that."

The Timberwolves lost the series in six games and, as it turned out, that would be the last time the franchise participated in the playoffs. The next season he was back at his natural, power forward position, which is where he continued to play all the way up to the third week of February 2012.

KG played every position in Minny, and did well. The man averaged over 5 assists for several seasons in Minny, as well as played down low:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1VQVYrtnYzs

You can see Kevin McHale's influence all over KG's game in some of those moves..the up-and-unders...

Skip Bayless is sadly ignorant if he fails to fully research exactly WHAT KG was called upon to do in Minny. It is this kind of blatant ignorance that makes ESPN seem biased toward/against certain players sometimes.

And KG being a good, loyal soldier like he was/is - did exactly what Flip wanted...and he is doing what Doc wants, to - evidently.

I won't post it here, but ask Josh Smith and Al Horford what KG did to them - in the post - in that clinching game 6 vs ATL last yr...28, 14 and 5 blocks.

Slightly off-topic, but I recall Michael Jordan's comments about certain players that "he" thought could play back in his era (Kobe, Dirk, a couple of others I can't recall). I thought it was odd he left out KG.

I think that in Michael's omission of KG, he probably (ignorantly) thought that KG being tall "should" play center or down low "exclusively", which I don't agree with in KG's case..

KG, being the talent that he was, would've revolutionized the 80's.

But back to Skip...I like his and A's commentary, but I think he's off on this one.

He should go talk to Flip Saunders.

Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: indeedproceed on March 08, 2013, 04:19:54 PM
Annoyed that I clicked on the video.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: CelticG1 on March 08, 2013, 04:30:09 PM
IMO, the battle for the title of greatest power forward of all-time is between KG and Duncan. KG in his prime was a monster. 22 points, 13 rebounds, 5 assists, a block, and a steal nightly (combined with game changing defense). IMO, it doesn't matter how you play the game as long as your effective and KG was pretty [dang] effective.

The way Kevin McHale is overlooked around here is something else.  He was a great on both ends of the floor and was regularly abusing people before he lost his lift by playing through ridiculous injuries in the playoffs.  He could D up nearly everyone (not so much Kareems sky hook) and score in the post on anybody.
No one could guard Kareem's sky hook.  Wouldn't really hold that against anyone.  I also wonder at people forgetting Karl Malone.  Yeah, he didn't win a championship, but he got [dang] close, and has the rest of the statistics to at least be in the conversation.  I mean, at KG's age he still averaged 26/10/4.

Karl Malone was a great player for a long time, but along with never winning, he was the only one of the all-time great PF's to play alongside a PG of Stockton's stature.


I'd go with Duncan/KG as the two best. McHale 3rd. Barkley/Malone round out the top 5.


KG is, IMHO, one of the three greatest defensive players ever (EVER). His career statistics are already one-of-a-kind (25K points, 15K rebounds, 5K assists, 1.5K steals, 1.5K blocks). His versatility makes him a very unique player.

Top three, who are the other two?

I presume Bill Russell is one. Who is the other one?

I don't think there is a top 3.  Russell and KG are just so far ahead of the rest of the pack.

However, if there was a top 3, I'd be inclined to give MJ serious consideration for the 3rd spot.  MJ's defense is often over-looked due to his prowess as a scorer.  He was an unbelievably good perimeter defender, though.

I'm not sure that KG's defense was that head-and-shoulders above everyone else.  There have been a lot of great defensive players.  Just talking big men since 1980, you've got Hakeem, Dikembe, Ben Wallace.

I really don't think Ben Wallace belongs on a list of all-time great defenders. Really never considered him to be dominant as a defender and it was a pretty quick peak.

Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: Onslaught on March 08, 2013, 04:39:22 PM
IMO, the battle for the title of greatest power forward of all-time is between KG and Duncan. KG in his prime was a monster. 22 points, 13 rebounds, 5 assists, a block, and a steal nightly (combined with game changing defense). IMO, it doesn't matter how you play the game as long as your effective and KG was pretty [dang] effective.

The way Kevin McHale is overlooked around here is something else.  He was a great on both ends of the floor and was regularly abusing people before he lost his lift by playing through ridiculous injuries in the playoffs.  He could D up nearly everyone (not so much Kareems sky hook) and score in the post on anybody.
No one could guard Kareem's sky hook.  Wouldn't really hold that against anyone.  I also wonder at people forgetting Karl Malone.  Yeah, he didn't win a championship, but he got [dang] close, and has the rest of the statistics to at least be in the conversation.  I mean, at KG's age he still averaged 26/10/4.

Karl Malone was a great player for a long time, but along with never winning, he was the only one of the all-time great PF's to play alongside a PG of Stockton's stature.


I'd go with Duncan/KG as the two best. McHale 3rd. Barkley/Malone round out the top 5.


KG is, IMHO, one of the three greatest defensive players ever (EVER). His career statistics are already one-of-a-kind (25K points, 15K rebounds, 5K assists, 1.5K steals, 1.5K blocks). His versatility makes him a very unique player.

Top three, who are the other two?

I presume Bill Russell is one. Who is the other one?

I don't think there is a top 3.  Russell and KG are just so far ahead of the rest of the pack.

However, if there was a top 3, I'd be inclined to give MJ serious consideration for the 3rd spot.  MJ's defense is often over-looked due to his prowess as a scorer.  He was an unbelievably good perimeter defender, though.

I'm not sure that KG's defense was that head-and-shoulders above everyone else.  There have been a lot of great defensive players.  Just talking big men since 1980, you've got Hakeem, Dikembe, Ben Wallace.

I really don't think Ben Wallace belongs on a list of all-time great defenders. Really never considered him to be dominant as a defender and it was a pretty quick peak.

Defensive Player Of The Year:2003,04,05,06
All NBA Defensive Teams: 6
Rebound titles: 2
Blocks: 2,055
Ranks No.16 in the playoffs history for most blocks per game recorded ever
Ranks No.10 in the playoffs history for most blocks
Ranks No.18 on the all time list for career blocks
Ranks No.34 on the all time list for most career rebounds
Ranks No.55 on the all time lists for most steals
Had 6 seasons of at least,10+ boards,2+ blocks and 1+ steals per game


That was just with a quick search. So I'd say he's got the goods for it.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: CelticG1 on March 08, 2013, 04:48:29 PM
IMO, the battle for the title of greatest power forward of all-time is between KG and Duncan. KG in his prime was a monster. 22 points, 13 rebounds, 5 assists, a block, and a steal nightly (combined with game changing defense). IMO, it doesn't matter how you play the game as long as your effective and KG was pretty [dang] effective.

The way Kevin McHale is overlooked around here is something else.  He was a great on both ends of the floor and was regularly abusing people before he lost his lift by playing through ridiculous injuries in the playoffs.  He could D up nearly everyone (not so much Kareems sky hook) and score in the post on anybody.
No one could guard Kareem's sky hook.  Wouldn't really hold that against anyone.  I also wonder at people forgetting Karl Malone.  Yeah, he didn't win a championship, but he got [dang] close, and has the rest of the statistics to at least be in the conversation.  I mean, at KG's age he still averaged 26/10/4.

Karl Malone was a great player for a long time, but along with never winning, he was the only one of the all-time great PF's to play alongside a PG of Stockton's stature.


I'd go with Duncan/KG as the two best. McHale 3rd. Barkley/Malone round out the top 5.


KG is, IMHO, one of the three greatest defensive players ever (EVER). His career statistics are already one-of-a-kind (25K points, 15K rebounds, 5K assists, 1.5K steals, 1.5K blocks). His versatility makes him a very unique player.

Top three, who are the other two?

I presume Bill Russell is one. Who is the other one?

I don't think there is a top 3.  Russell and KG are just so far ahead of the rest of the pack.

However, if there was a top 3, I'd be inclined to give MJ serious consideration for the 3rd spot.  MJ's defense is often over-looked due to his prowess as a scorer.  He was an unbelievably good perimeter defender, though.

I'm not sure that KG's defense was that head-and-shoulders above everyone else.  There have been a lot of great defensive players.  Just talking big men since 1980, you've got Hakeem, Dikembe, Ben Wallace.

I really don't think Ben Wallace belongs on a list of all-time great defenders. Really never considered him to be dominant as a defender and it was a pretty quick peak.

Defensive Player Of The Year:2003,04,05,06
All NBA Defensive Teams: 6
Rebound titles: 2
Blocks: 2,055
Ranks No.16 in the playoffs history for most blocks per game recorded ever
Ranks No.10 in the playoffs history for most blocks
Ranks No.18 on the all time list for career blocks
Ranks No.34 on the all time list for most career rebounds
Ranks No.55 on the all time lists for most steals
Had 6 seasons of at least,10+ boards,2+ blocks and 1+ steals per game


That was just with a quick search. So I'd say he's got the goods for it.

Yeah to me those aren't the goods. I'm thinking if we are talking Best defenders from 1980 he isn't top 3.

Yeah he was a great defender but top 3 over the past 30 years? No not to me.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: Roy H. on March 08, 2013, 04:59:39 PM
IMO, the battle for the title of greatest power forward of all-time is between KG and Duncan. KG in his prime was a monster. 22 points, 13 rebounds, 5 assists, a block, and a steal nightly (combined with game changing defense). IMO, it doesn't matter how you play the game as long as your effective and KG was pretty [dang] effective.

The way Kevin McHale is overlooked around here is something else.  He was a great on both ends of the floor and was regularly abusing people before he lost his lift by playing through ridiculous injuries in the playoffs.  He could D up nearly everyone (not so much Kareems sky hook) and score in the post on anybody.
No one could guard Kareem's sky hook.  Wouldn't really hold that against anyone.  I also wonder at people forgetting Karl Malone.  Yeah, he didn't win a championship, but he got [dang] close, and has the rest of the statistics to at least be in the conversation.  I mean, at KG's age he still averaged 26/10/4.

Karl Malone was a great player for a long time, but along with never winning, he was the only one of the all-time great PF's to play alongside a PG of Stockton's stature.


I'd go with Duncan/KG as the two best. McHale 3rd. Barkley/Malone round out the top 5.


KG is, IMHO, one of the three greatest defensive players ever (EVER). His career statistics are already one-of-a-kind (25K points, 15K rebounds, 5K assists, 1.5K steals, 1.5K blocks). His versatility makes him a very unique player.

Top three, who are the other two?

I presume Bill Russell is one. Who is the other one?

I don't think there is a top 3.  Russell and KG are just so far ahead of the rest of the pack.

However, if there was a top 3, I'd be inclined to give MJ serious consideration for the 3rd spot.  MJ's defense is often over-looked due to his prowess as a scorer.  He was an unbelievably good perimeter defender, though.

I'm not sure that KG's defense was that head-and-shoulders above everyone else.  There have been a lot of great defensive players.  Just talking big men since 1980, you've got Hakeem, Dikembe, Ben Wallace.

I really don't think Ben Wallace belongs on a list of all-time great defenders. Really never considered him to be dominant as a defender and it was a pretty quick peak.

Defensive Player Of The Year:2003,04,05,06
All NBA Defensive Teams: 6
Rebound titles: 2
Blocks: 2,055
Ranks No.16 in the playoffs history for most blocks per game recorded ever
Ranks No.10 in the playoffs history for most blocks
Ranks No.18 on the all time list for career blocks
Ranks No.34 on the all time list for most career rebounds
Ranks No.55 on the all time lists for most steals
Had 6 seasons of at least,10+ boards,2+ blocks and 1+ steals per game


That was just with a quick search. So I'd say he's got the goods for it.

Yeah to me those aren't the goods. I'm thinking if we are talking Best defenders from 1980 he isn't top 3.

Yeah he was a great defender but top 3 over the past 30 years? No not to me.

I never said he was top-3 of the past 30 years.  However, I don't think KG stands head-and-shoulders over Wallace as a defender.

Wallace won four DPOY awards.  He'll be recognized as a historically great defender.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: scaryjerry on March 08, 2013, 05:12:49 PM
They never said he wasn't an all time great....they rightly said he could've been better.

he really wasn't a winner until he got here, and he didn't have great teammates because of his own contract...deal with it.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: LooseCannon on March 08, 2013, 05:27:30 PM
I think Garnett getting more of his offense inside would have made him worse.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: RebusRankin on March 08, 2013, 06:26:29 PM
2001-2003, Wally Szczerbiak was the second best player playing with KG. KG is MVP runner up both years and his team wins 50 games. Duncan is the MVP those two years and has David Robinson at the end of his career, plus a young Tony Parker, young Manu, Stephan Jackson etc.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: CelticConcourse on March 08, 2013, 06:38:20 PM
They never said he wasn't an all time great....they rightly said he could've been better.

he really wasn't a winner until he got here, and he didn't have great teammates because of his own contract...deal with it.

Blame the organization, not the contract.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: CelticG1 on March 08, 2013, 07:33:36 PM
IMO, the battle for the title of greatest power forward of all-time is between KG and Duncan. KG in his prime was a monster. 22 points, 13 rebounds, 5 assists, a block, and a steal nightly (combined with game changing defense). IMO, it doesn't matter how you play the game as long as your effective and KG was pretty [dang] effective.

The way Kevin McHale is overlooked around here is something else.  He was a great on both ends of the floor and was regularly abusing people before he lost his lift by playing through ridiculous injuries in the playoffs.  He could D up nearly everyone (not so much Kareems sky hook) and score in the post on anybody.
No one could guard Kareem's sky hook.  Wouldn't really hold that against anyone.  I also wonder at people forgetting Karl Malone.  Yeah, he didn't win a championship, but he got [dang] close, and has the rest of the statistics to at least be in the conversation.  I mean, at KG's age he still averaged 26/10/4.

Karl Malone was a great player for a long time, but along with never winning, he was the only one of the all-time great PF's to play alongside a PG of Stockton's stature.


I'd go with Duncan/KG as the two best. McHale 3rd. Barkley/Malone round out the top 5.


KG is, IMHO, one of the three greatest defensive players ever (EVER). His career statistics are already one-of-a-kind (25K points, 15K rebounds, 5K assists, 1.5K steals, 1.5K blocks). His versatility makes him a very unique player.

Top three, who are the other two?

I presume Bill Russell is one. Who is the other one?

I don't think there is a top 3.  Russell and KG are just so far ahead of the rest of the pack.

However, if there was a top 3, I'd be inclined to give MJ serious consideration for the 3rd spot.  MJ's defense is often over-looked due to his prowess as a scorer.  He was an unbelievably good perimeter defender, though.

I'm not sure that KG's defense was that head-and-shoulders above everyone else.  There have been a lot of great defensive players.  Just talking big men since 1980, you've got Hakeem, Dikembe, Ben Wallace.

I really don't think Ben Wallace belongs on a list of all-time great defenders. Really never considered him to be dominant as a defender and it was a pretty quick peak.

Defensive Player Of The Year:2003,04,05,06
All NBA Defensive Teams: 6
Rebound titles: 2
Blocks: 2,055
Ranks No.16 in the playoffs history for most blocks per game recorded ever
Ranks No.10 in the playoffs history for most blocks
Ranks No.18 on the all time list for career blocks
Ranks No.34 on the all time list for most career rebounds
Ranks No.55 on the all time lists for most steals
Had 6 seasons of at least,10+ boards,2+ blocks and 1+ steals per game


That was just with a quick search. So I'd say he's got the goods for it.

Yeah to me those aren't the goods. I'm thinking if we are talking Best defenders from 1980 he isn't top 3.

Yeah he was a great defender but top 3 over the past 30 years? No not to me.

I never said he was top-3 of the past 30 years.  However, I don't think KG stands head-and-shoulders over Wallace as a defender.

Wallace won four DPOY awards.  He'll be recognized as a historically great defender.

He may be I don't think he should be though.

It is hard to tell because it's hard to say would you rather have KG with zero offense or Ben wallace and it's just hard to picture or imagine.

I think a lot of times all-time greats or guys that can really score the ball certainly are hurt when it comes to "DPOY" award.

It's pretty rare for an MVP to win DPOY award to and to me I think part of the reason is because they like to spread the wealth around a little.

I mean is Serge Ibaka or Tyson Chandler really a better defender than Lebron James?
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: GreenEnvy on March 11, 2013, 12:56:12 AM
IMO, the battle for the title of greatest power forward of all-time is between KG and Duncan. KG in his prime was a monster. 22 points, 13 rebounds, 5 assists, a block, and a steal nightly (combined with game changing defense). IMO, it doesn't matter how you play the game as long as your effective and KG was pretty [dang] effective.

The way Kevin McHale is overlooked around here is something else.  He was a great on both ends of the floor and was regularly abusing people before he lost his lift by playing through ridiculous injuries in the playoffs.  He could D up nearly everyone (not so much Kareems sky hook) and score in the post on anybody.
No one could guard Kareem's sky hook.  Wouldn't really hold that against anyone.  I also wonder at people forgetting Karl Malone.  Yeah, he didn't win a championship, but he got [dang] close, and has the rest of the statistics to at least be in the conversation.  I mean, at KG's age he still averaged 26/10/4.

Karl Malone was a great player for a long time, but along with never winning, he was the only one of the all-time great PF's to play alongside a PG of Stockton's stature.


I'd go with Duncan/KG as the two best. McHale 3rd. Barkley/Malone round out the top 5.


KG is, IMHO, one of the three greatest defensive players ever (EVER). His career statistics are already one-of-a-kind (25K points, 15K rebounds, 5K assists, 1.5K steals, 1.5K blocks). His versatility makes him a very unique player.

Top three, who are the other two?

I presume Bill Russell is one. Who is the other one?

Russell and Hakeem. I'd sandwich KG between them.

I would never consider a backcourt/wing player in the discussion, but watching AB every game makes me think guys like Payton and Pippen could have impacted games nearly as much as an all-time great big could.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: Surferdad on March 11, 2013, 03:44:10 AM
I just can give no weight or import to anything Skip "Way-Less" Bayless says ... he's one of those people my minds shuts off every time it hears his voice.

I guess he's allowed an opinion like the rest of us, it's just sad that he's able to spread it around so far-and-wide, (he and Felger should hook up ... two-of-a-kind).
But he has a megaphone too, so apparently more of a right than most of us to throw his idiotic opinion out there. Guys like him and Felger pretend to know basketball but they know nothing. Felger will forever think that Paul Pierce fakes every single injury, apparently he doesn't think basketball is a contact sport. Both jerks.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: Moranis on March 11, 2013, 06:24:13 AM
IMO, the battle for the title of greatest power forward of all-time is between KG and Duncan. KG in his prime was a monster. 22 points, 13 rebounds, 5 assists, a block, and a steal nightly (combined with game changing defense). IMO, it doesn't matter how you play the game as long as your effective and KG was pretty [dang] effective.

The way Kevin McHale is overlooked around here is something else.  He was a great on both ends of the floor and was regularly abusing people before he lost his lift by playing through ridiculous injuries in the playoffs.  He could D up nearly everyone (not so much Kareems sky hook) and score in the post on anybody.
No one could guard Kareem's sky hook.  Wouldn't really hold that against anyone.  I also wonder at people forgetting Karl Malone.  Yeah, he didn't win a championship, but he got [dang] close, and has the rest of the statistics to at least be in the conversation.  I mean, at KG's age he still averaged 26/10/4.

Karl Malone was a great player for a long time, but along with never winning, he was the only one of the all-time great PF's to play alongside a PG of Stockton's stature.


I'd go with Duncan/KG as the two best. McHale 3rd. Barkley/Malone round out the top 5.


KG is, IMHO, one of the three greatest defensive players ever (EVER). His career statistics are already one-of-a-kind (25K points, 15K rebounds, 5K assists, 1.5K steals, 1.5K blocks). His versatility makes him a very unique player.

Top three, who are the other two?

I presume Bill Russell is one. Who is the other one?
Dennis Rodman is the greatest defender I've seen in my lifetime and I don't think it is close.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: Snakehead on March 11, 2013, 08:29:00 AM
2001-2003, Wally Szczerbiak was the second best player playing with KG. KG is MVP runner up both years and his team wins 50 games. Duncan is the MVP those two years and has David Robinson at the end of his career, plus a young Tony Parker, young Manu, Stephan Jackson etc.

I think this says all you need to say comparing them.

I wish I could post the image, but in the FreeDarko book, they have a diagram in the KG section that makes each player on a team's total production as a circle that is larger with more total production, with each team being cluster of these circles.  They have a few different teams shown, and KGs Timberwolves teams show his as KG's massive circle surrounded by much smaller ones.  He was so central to why these teams succeeded, he never played with anyone remotely close to his level.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: crownsy on March 11, 2013, 09:49:17 AM
That's what you get for watching First Take.  From my experience, this is the level of "analysis" they show there daily.

Unless you define "all-time great" as being among the top 5 or 6 players ever, then of course KG is a historically great player.  He is a clear-cut top-five PF of all-time, and some would say the best PF ever (although I would disagree).

TP, I don't get the appeal. I mean, people realize that they literally talk out what completely contrasting opinions they are going to take just to yell at each other right?

I mean yes, all talk shows do that, but this one is even faker than most. There was a clip not to long ago that I can't find on youtube, where Skip and Smith thought they were off air and skip asks smith something like " wait, whats my position on this? Am I doing the pro or negative take?"

I mean, I get that all talking head shows do this, but it seems like these two, and skip in particular, don't really have any actual facts to articulate to defend their positions because they are just fed them by a producer.

Felger and Maz, for example, are the same setup, but I believe they actually hold their opinions, and can defend them in an intelligent manner. I feel like on first take, they just show up for the day and are told what to say and to scream at each other. Stopped watching it awhile ago.   

As to is KG an all time great, Of course he is. Not in a "oh man he's top 5 all time!!!!" way, but top 30-25 of all time? you bet.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: crownsy on March 11, 2013, 10:07:25 AM
I just can give no weight or import to anything Skip "Way-Less" Bayless says ... he's one of those people my minds shuts off every time it hears his voice.

I guess he's allowed an opinion like the rest of us, it's just sad that he's able to spread it around so far-and-wide, (he and Felger should hook up ... two-of-a-kind).
But he has a megaphone too, so apparently more of a right than most of us to throw his idiotic opinion out there. Guys like him and Felger pretend to know basketball but they know nothing. Felger will forever think that Paul Pierce fakes every single injury, apparently he doesn't think basketball is a contact sport. Both jerks.

The difference is, felger prefaces every celtics rant by saying he's not a fan of the sport and not as knowledgeable as actual basketball writers/hosts ect.

Skip would have you believe he's on the same level as Wojo.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: Snakehead on March 11, 2013, 10:20:32 AM
[quote author=crownsy
Felger and Maz, for example, are the same setup, but I believe they actually hold their opinions, and can defend them in an intelligent manner. I feel like on first take, they just show up for the day and are told what to say and to scream at each other. Stopped watching it awhile ago.   

[/quote]

You had me, and then you lost me.

Felger and Maz are as bad and uninformed as it gets.  Worst than First Take, which is saying something.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: crownsy on March 11, 2013, 10:46:46 AM
How so?

Look, Felger certainly plays up the contrarian stance to tweak the audience, but he always has some sort of factual basis for his stance, and will defend his opnions when callers want to debate him on them.

Skip just takes whatever is handed to him and screams "I'M RIGHT!!! NA NA!!! I DRIVE A DODGE STRATUS!!!!!" and never has ANY facts to back anything he says up, or even a opinion he can articulate beyond "OUTRAGE!!!!" . he never has any analysis, ect other than "derp, my gut says so, so your wrong, deeerrp."

Felger is certainly annoying, and I understand he tweaks us celtics fans harder than most because he admits he knows nothing about basketball yet proceeds to discuss it, but felger is a far better sports talking head than skip, it's not even close.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: Eja117 on March 11, 2013, 11:02:10 AM
I saw Stephen A. Smith's face and decided not to click play.

I hate to say this, because Stephen A. Smith is a friend of mine. Stephen A. Smith performed my son's briss. Stephen A. Smith and I own a timeshare together in Ogunquit with side-by-side clawfoot bathtubs overlooking the water.

but Stephen A. Smith is a complete boob and no one should ever take anything he says seriously ever. If I was in a crowded movie theater and Stephen A. Smith yelled "fire," I would sit tight and hope that at least it meant he was leaving.
T to the P on that one. That is the most creative way of saying you don't like a sports personality I ever saw
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: Eja117 on March 11, 2013, 11:15:34 AM
First take to me is kind of an example of two wrongs making a right. And Skip is usually right.

But I'd say KG strikes me kind of like Skip said .....an all time great, but not near all time greatest. Just in his era I'd put both Duncan and Dirk ahead of him.

I feel this same way every time someone mentions Wilt Chamberlain.  I just think "Oh. You mean that guy that Russell always beat?"  I feel the same way in the Brady vs Peyton argument.

And I don't buy the teammate argument in this. If you give KG Tony Parker and Manu and you give Duncan PP and Ray and Rondo what happens? 

And I'm fine with the rings only count as tie breaker argument. All these guys have stats so lets go to the rings? Now what?

On a scale from one to ten Duncan is a ten. Kg is like an 8.9. 8.9 is really really good. It's Hall of Fame. But it's not a ten.

Basically if you walk down the Hall of Fame corridor (fictionally) and there's a door that says "Best power forwards ever" the busts of Dirk and KG are guarding that door with Malone and Barkley right before them...in the buildup to that room.  Also Sistine Chapel style paintings of Dennis Rodman are on the ceiling.  Bill Walton welcomes you in.  Duncan is in the throne. And Ducan is watching video of Kevin McHale. The basketball player, not the Glee singer

Although on the other hand I do think Malone and Barkley's two Olympic golds count for at least one ring. Duncan and Dirk don't have one and KG has one
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: dinome18 on March 11, 2013, 11:23:32 AM
Dirk ahead of KG? :o. That's plain silly. lol
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: KGs Knee on March 11, 2013, 11:34:41 AM

But I'd say KG strikes me kind of like Skip said .....an all time great, but not near all time greatest. Just in his era I'd put both Duncan and Dirk ahead of him.

Are you kidding me?  No way is Dirk better than KG.  Not ever!  Dirk was a completely one dimensional player (offense) for much of his career.

KG is better than Duncan also, in my opinion, but I'd concede it's very close.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: Moranis on March 11, 2013, 11:49:28 AM
The top 6 PF's are Malone, Duncan, Garnett, Barkley, Mchale, and Nowitzki (I have Elgin Baylor as a SF and thus is not on this list). I think you could make an argument for any one of those guys being the best, but I personally believe it is Malone.  He was by far the most prolific scorer, was a comparable rebounder to the other 6, and was a very under rated defender.  He also was still winning league MVP's at the age of 35. 

Malone's career numbers are 25.0 p, 10.1 r, 3.6 a, 1.4 s, 0.8 b per game.  That includes the beginning and end of his career when all players are far from their peak.  To put that type of scoring in perspective Garnett has never even averaged 25 points a game for a season and Duncan and McHale each only did it 1 time.

After Malone, I have in order Duncan, Barkley, Garnett, McHale, and Nowitzki.  Duncan is pretty clearly #2 to me.  Winning matters and he was by far the best player on 3 title teams (and may have been better than Robinson for the first).  You can't ignore that, but at the same time Malone did more with less (those teams were Malone, Stockton who wasn't a scorer and a bunch of crap for the most part) and had far superior numbers so I gave him the nod at #1.  Dirk loses points because he is a much weaker rebounder than the others and I had to dock McHale because he was never his teams best player and thus never had to be the man.  I think he could have done it just fine, but he was never in that position so it is hard to say.  Barkley and Garnett were close for me, but I gave the edge to Barkley due to his far superior numbers, which to me outweigh KG's 1 title, which came after he was on an ensemble team rather than the man.

So for me the 6 greatest PF's in history are

1. Malone
2. Duncan
3. Barkley
4. Garnett
5. McHale
6. Nowitzki

I think a guy like Rodman despite being totally worthless on the offensive end probably would come in at 7 because he was the greatest rebounder in history (compared to league average) and perhaps the greatest defender in league history as well. 
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: Eja117 on March 11, 2013, 12:09:30 PM
I think Rodman is totally underrated and I'm annoyed he never made an Olympic team, when he clearly shows what American freedom can be all about.

He's the only guy I ever saw defend a prime Shaq man to man straight up. I couldn't believe what I was seeing

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wg3BiOw4TWo
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: Eja117 on March 11, 2013, 12:21:20 PM
Dirk ahead of KG? :o. That's plain silly. lol
Dirk beat the big three of Miami face to face and didn't have tons of help. 
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: nickagneta on March 11, 2013, 12:30:43 PM
Large 2 guards don't lead the league in rebounding for years at a time. The notion KG is just an overgrown 2 guard is preposterous. There is only one guy in league history that have ever done 20/10/5 over 6 straight years, KG.

Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: drza44 on March 11, 2013, 01:49:37 PM
And I don't buy the teammate argument in this. If you give KG Tony Parker and Manu and you give Duncan PP and Ray and Rondo what happens? 

Wait.  The teammate argument deals with when they were in their primes.  If you gave KG PP, Ray and Rondo during the years when Duncan was winning championships then teammates would never be brought up.

The real swap is if you gave Duncan teams featuring the pu pu platter from Minnesota and gave KG Robinson, Parker and Manu what would happen?  And it's a much different answer.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: Eja117 on March 11, 2013, 01:55:00 PM
And I don't buy the teammate argument in this. If you give KG Tony Parker and Manu and you give Duncan PP and Ray and Rondo what happens? 

Wait.  The teammate argument deals with when they were in their primes.  If you gave KG PP, Ray and Rondo during the years when Duncan was winning championships then teammates would never be brought up.

The real swap is if you gave Duncan teams featuring the pu pu platter from Minnesota and gave KG Robinson, Parker and Manu what would happen?  And it's a much different answer.
Well I guess technically we need to give them 4 clones...or clone 4 more Duncans and 4 more Garnetts.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: hpantazo on March 11, 2013, 02:08:55 PM
Wow, I always viewed KG as equal to Tim Duncan even before he came to the celtics and won a ring. I never, ever considered Dirk close to their level. Dirk is a great player, had a nice run for a few seasons, but nowhere near KG or Duncan in terms of consistent domination and how they impact the game overall.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: CelticsFan9 on March 11, 2013, 02:10:07 PM
Jeez, McHale is being underrated here, in my opinion.  I wasn't alive when he played, but from what I've read, and from what I've watched, the guy was a monster on the block, arguably the best post player ever.  If his feet don't give out, the guy probably could've played into his forties.

Duncan is better than KG.  For starters, he has more rings.  Second, he could play any style.  He won two titles during the era when defense beats offense, he won another title during the era where the league was adjusting to new rules, and he won another when the league became offense, small ball oriented.  Even today, he is performing at an incredibly high on a team that has consistently won year after year after year.  Finally, he could adapt to any game or situation.  If the Spurs needed 30 points, he'd do it.  If they needed 20 rebounds, he'd do it.  If they needed him to play defense and do the dirty work, he'd do it.  I don't think the same could be said for KG (just personal opinion).

KG is all-time great.  I love the guy, and he probably became the first guy who was an elite player that was a jump shooting big.  I'd go as far to say there's no Kevin Durant game today if it weren't for KG.  His defense and intensity are characteristics I'll always appreciate.

Malone is one of those guys who did great things, but in the end left you wanting more.  I'm a firm believer that if he wasn't so scared in the clutch, those Jazz teams could have knocked off the Bulls.  He was the best running big man ever, one of the most well conditioned players ever, and his PNR game with Stockton was one of the most unstoppable plays ever.

Nowitzki probably did the most globally out of all these PFs.  After winning the title, his fame skyrocketed across the world, even after being loved worldwide, especially in Europe.  I'd also venture to say his championship was the most improbable out of any of these PFs.  Against the Blazers, everyone thought Dallas would choke, because they always did (and they collapsed in the Brandon Roy Game 4 masterpiece).  But they pulled it out, and then SWEPT the defending champs, without HCA.  That is impressive in itself.  Then, Dirk single-handedly destroyed the Thunder, and capped off the playoff run by humiliating the Heat.

All that being said, my list goes like this:

Duncan
McHale
Garnett/Malone (it could really go either way)
Nowitzki
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: CelticG1 on March 11, 2013, 02:36:52 PM
Jeez, McHale is being underrated here, in my opinion.  I wasn't alive when he played, but from what I've read, and from what I've watched, the guy was a monster on the block, arguably the best post player ever.  If his feet don't give out, the guy probably could've played into his forties.

Duncan is better than KG.  For starters, he has more rings.  Second, he could play any style.  He won two titles during the era when defense beats offense, he won another title during the era where the league was adjusting to new rules, and he won another when the league became offense, small ball oriented.  Even today, he is performing at an incredibly high on a team that has consistently won year after year after year.  Finally, he could adapt to any game or situation.  If the Spurs needed 30 points, he'd do it.  If they needed 20 rebounds, he'd do it.  If they needed him to play defense and do the dirty work, he'd do it.  I don't think the same could be said for KG (just personal opinion).

KG is all-time great.  I love the guy, and he probably became the first guy who was an elite player that was a jump shooting big.  I'd go as far to say there's no Kevin Durant game today if it weren't for KG.  His defense and intensity are characteristics I'll always appreciate.

Malone is one of those guys who did great things, but in the end left you wanting more.  I'm a firm believer that if he wasn't so scared in the clutch, those Jazz teams could have knocked off the Bulls.  He was the best running big man ever, one of the most well conditioned players ever, and his PNR game with Stockton was one of the most unstoppable plays ever.

Nowitzki probably did the most globally out of all these PFs.  After winning the title, his fame skyrocketed across the world, even after being loved worldwide, especially in Europe.  I'd also venture to say his championship was the most improbable out of any of these PFs.  Against the Blazers, everyone thought Dallas would choke, because they always did (and they collapsed in the Brandon Roy Game 4 masterpiece).  But they pulled it out, and then SWEPT the defending champs, without HCA.  That is impressive in itself.  Then, Dirk single-handedly destroyed the Thunder, and capped off the playoff run by humiliating the Heat.

All that being said, my list goes like this:

Duncan
McHale
Garnett/Malone (it could really go either way)
Nowitzki

McHale rightfully loses points for his lack of longevity, which imo is a huge thing to look at when considering all time greats.

I dont really get your point about his feet. Yeah if no one got injured or aged they could play until they're 40
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: KGs Knee on March 11, 2013, 02:39:59 PM
Jeez, McHale is being underrated here, in my opinion.  I wasn't alive when he played, but from what I've read, and from what I've watched, the guy was a monster on the block, arguably the best post player ever.  If his feet don't give out, the guy probably could've played into his forties.

Duncan is better than KG.  For starters, he has more rings.  Second, he could play any style.  He won two titles during the era when defense beats offense, he won another title during the era where the league was adjusting to new rules, and he won another when the league became offense, small ball oriented.  Even today, he is performing at an incredibly high on a team that has consistently won year after year after year.  Finally, he could adapt to any game or situation.  If the Spurs needed 30 points, he'd do it.  If they needed 20 rebounds, he'd do it.  If they needed him to play defense and do the dirty work, he'd do it.  I don't think the same could be said for KG (just personal opinion).

KG is all-time great.  I love the guy, and he probably became the first guy who was an elite player that was a jump shooting big.  I'd go as far to say there's no Kevin Durant game today if it weren't for KG.  His defense and intensity are characteristics I'll always appreciate.

Malone is one of those guys who did great things, but in the end left you wanting more.  I'm a firm believer that if he wasn't so scared in the clutch, those Jazz teams could have knocked off the Bulls.  He was the best running big man ever, one of the most well conditioned players ever, and his PNR game with Stockton was one of the most unstoppable plays ever.

Nowitzki probably did the most globally out of all these PFs.  After winning the title, his fame skyrocketed across the world, even after being loved worldwide, especially in Europe.  I'd also venture to say his championship was the most improbable out of any of these PFs.  Against the Blazers, everyone thought Dallas would choke, because they always did (and they collapsed in the Brandon Roy Game 4 masterpiece).  But they pulled it out, and then SWEPT the defending champs, without HCA.  That is impressive in itself.  Then, Dirk single-handedly destroyed the Thunder, and capped off the playoff run by humiliating the Heat.

All that being said, my list goes like this:

Duncan
McHale
Garnett/Malone (it could really go either way)
Nowitzki

McHale rightfully loses points for his lack of longevity, which imo is a huge thing to look at when considering all time greats.

I dont really get your point about his feet. Yeah if no one got injured or aged they could play until they're 40

Yeah, you have to factor injuries.  Otherwise, if KG doesn't go down with his knee injury, there's a strong possibility he has a 3-peat on his resume.

KG would have the title as best PF ever locked up if that happened.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: gar on March 11, 2013, 03:06:35 PM
My Reply

Name me another player that has 25000 points 10000 rebounds 5000 assists almost 2000 blocks and over 1000 steals......


OH THATS RIGHT... THERE ISNT ANY!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Man is in a league of his own.

Factor in the way he makes those around him play harder, and the way he anchors a defence.

You have an all time great there

The Arc of K.G.s career is unprecedented. Some have won more championships, some have shot more 3's; but none have done it all the way that K.G. has.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: CelticsFan9 on March 11, 2013, 03:43:11 PM
Jeez, McHale is being underrated here, in my opinion.  I wasn't alive when he played, but from what I've read, and from what I've watched, the guy was a monster on the block, arguably the best post player ever.  If his feet don't give out, the guy probably could've played into his forties.

Duncan is better than KG.  For starters, he has more rings.  Second, he could play any style.  He won two titles during the era when defense beats offense, he won another title during the era where the league was adjusting to new rules, and he won another when the league became offense, small ball oriented.  Even today, he is performing at an incredibly high on a team that has consistently won year after year after year.  Finally, he could adapt to any game or situation.  If the Spurs needed 30 points, he'd do it.  If they needed 20 rebounds, he'd do it.  If they needed him to play defense and do the dirty work, he'd do it.  I don't think the same could be said for KG (just personal opinion).

KG is all-time great.  I love the guy, and he probably became the first guy who was an elite player that was a jump shooting big.  I'd go as far to say there's no Kevin Durant game today if it weren't for KG.  His defense and intensity are characteristics I'll always appreciate.

Malone is one of those guys who did great things, but in the end left you wanting more.  I'm a firm believer that if he wasn't so scared in the clutch, those Jazz teams could have knocked off the Bulls.  He was the best running big man ever, one of the most well conditioned players ever, and his PNR game with Stockton was one of the most unstoppable plays ever.

Nowitzki probably did the most globally out of all these PFs.  After winning the title, his fame skyrocketed across the world, even after being loved worldwide, especially in Europe.  I'd also venture to say his championship was the most improbable out of any of these PFs.  Against the Blazers, everyone thought Dallas would choke, because they always did (and they collapsed in the Brandon Roy Game 4 masterpiece).  But they pulled it out, and then SWEPT the defending champs, without HCA.  That is impressive in itself.  Then, Dirk single-handedly destroyed the Thunder, and capped off the playoff run by humiliating the Heat.

All that being said, my list goes like this:

Duncan
McHale
Garnett/Malone (it could really go either way)
Nowitzki

McHale rightfully loses points for his lack of longevity, which imo is a huge thing to look at when considering all time greats.

I dont really get your point about his feet. Yeah if no one got injured or aged they could play until they're 40

It's impossible for people to not age.  It is possible for people to have healthy careers.

Strongly disagree about all players being able to pay in to their forties if they stayed healthy.

For example, look at Rondo.  Even if that injury never happens, he still wouldn't last that long in the league (maybe until he's 34 or 35) unless he changes his game.  Whenever a person a ages (especially athletes), they tend to lose athleticism, right?  Rondo, a guy who relies heavily on athleticism, would be a significantly worse player in his later years.  You know why Kidd is still playing?  Because he can pass and shoot.  If he still couldn't shoot, I'd argue he'd be out of the league.  Same goes for Rondo.  That's why this injury scares me so much.  If Rondo loses a chunk of athleticism, he'll never be the great player he has the potential to be.

The reason a guy like McHale could play into his forties is because the way he played would've been unstoppable, whether he was 20 or 40.  His endless array of post moves worked on anybody from when he entered the league to when he was forced to leave it.  What makes you think those moves wouldn't have worked past that time.  I'd bet they would.

And lack of longevity?  Well, then I'd argue KG loses points there.  The guy has a freaking minutes restriction for crying out loud.  Yeah, the argument could be made that he has that because he injured his knee, but then why can't I use that argument for McHale?  It goes both ways.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: Moranis on March 11, 2013, 03:49:13 PM
Jeez, McHale is being underrated here, in my opinion.  I wasn't alive when he played, but from what I've read, and from what I've watched, the guy was a monster on the block, arguably the best post player ever.  If his feet don't give out, the guy probably could've played into his forties.

Duncan is better than KG.  For starters, he has more rings.  Second, he could play any style.  He won two titles during the era when defense beats offense, he won another title during the era where the league was adjusting to new rules, and he won another when the league became offense, small ball oriented.  Even today, he is performing at an incredibly high on a team that has consistently won year after year after year.  Finally, he could adapt to any game or situation.  If the Spurs needed 30 points, he'd do it.  If they needed 20 rebounds, he'd do it.  If they needed him to play defense and do the dirty work, he'd do it.  I don't think the same could be said for KG (just personal opinion).

KG is all-time great.  I love the guy, and he probably became the first guy who was an elite player that was a jump shooting big.  I'd go as far to say there's no Kevin Durant game today if it weren't for KG.  His defense and intensity are characteristics I'll always appreciate.

Malone is one of those guys who did great things, but in the end left you wanting more.  I'm a firm believer that if he wasn't so scared in the clutch, those Jazz teams could have knocked off the Bulls.  He was the best running big man ever, one of the most well conditioned players ever, and his PNR game with Stockton was one of the most unstoppable plays ever.

Nowitzki probably did the most globally out of all these PFs.  After winning the title, his fame skyrocketed across the world, even after being loved worldwide, especially in Europe.  I'd also venture to say his championship was the most improbable out of any of these PFs.  Against the Blazers, everyone thought Dallas would choke, because they always did (and they collapsed in the Brandon Roy Game 4 masterpiece).  But they pulled it out, and then SWEPT the defending champs, without HCA.  That is impressive in itself.  Then, Dirk single-handedly destroyed the Thunder, and capped off the playoff run by humiliating the Heat.

All that being said, my list goes like this:

Duncan
McHale
Garnett/Malone (it could really go either way)
Nowitzki

McHale rightfully loses points for his lack of longevity, which imo is a huge thing to look at when considering all time greats.

I dont really get your point about his feet. Yeah if no one got injured or aged they could play until they're 40

It's impossible for people to not age.  It is possible for people to have healthy careers.

Strongly disagree about all players being able to pay in to their forties if they stayed healthy.

For example, look at Rondo.  Even if that injury never happens, he still wouldn't last that long in the league (maybe until he's 34 or 35) unless he changes his game.  Whenever a person a ages (especially athletes), they tend to lose athleticism, right?  Rondo, a guy who relies heavily on athleticism, would be a significantly worse player in his later years.  You know why Kidd is still playing?  Because he can pass and shoot.  If he still couldn't shoot, I'd argue he'd be out of the league.  Same goes for Rondo.  That's why this injury scares me so much.  If Rondo loses a chunk of athleticism, he'll never be the great player he has the potential to be.

The reason a guy like McHale could play into his forties is because the way he played would've been unstoppable, whether he was 20 or 40.  His endless array of post moves worked on anybody from when he entered the league to when he was forced to leave it.  What makes you think those moves wouldn't have worked past that time.  I'd bet they would.

And lack of longevity?  Well, then I'd argue KG loses points there.  The guy has a freaking minutes restriction for crying out loud.  Yeah, the argument could be made that he has that because he injured his knee, but then why can't I use that argument for McHale?  It goes both ways.
KG is in his 18th season.  McHale was in the HOF 18 years after he started playing professionally.

EDIT: The thing with McHale is he wasn't a great rebounder, never averaged 10 a game, and he wasn't a great defender (he was good, but far from great).  He was a highly gifted offensive player in the post, but he wasn't taking you out of the paint to score either and he rarely had to face double teams because he was never the man.  Players often look a lot different when they don't have to be the man then when they are the man.  Since you never saw McHale lead a team as the man, you just don't know how effective he truly could have been when he was getting double teamed constantly (which he never was because of Bird, Parish, and DJ surrounding him).
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: CelticsFan9 on March 11, 2013, 03:59:01 PM
Jeez, McHale is being underrated here, in my opinion.  I wasn't alive when he played, but from what I've read, and from what I've watched, the guy was a monster on the block, arguably the best post player ever.  If his feet don't give out, the guy probably could've played into his forties.

Duncan is better than KG.  For starters, he has more rings.  Second, he could play any style.  He won two titles during the era when defense beats offense, he won another title during the era where the league was adjusting to new rules, and he won another when the league became offense, small ball oriented.  Even today, he is performing at an incredibly high on a team that has consistently won year after year after year.  Finally, he could adapt to any game or situation.  If the Spurs needed 30 points, he'd do it.  If they needed 20 rebounds, he'd do it.  If they needed him to play defense and do the dirty work, he'd do it.  I don't think the same could be said for KG (just personal opinion).

KG is all-time great.  I love the guy, and he probably became the first guy who was an elite player that was a jump shooting big.  I'd go as far to say there's no Kevin Durant game today if it weren't for KG.  His defense and intensity are characteristics I'll always appreciate.

Malone is one of those guys who did great things, but in the end left you wanting more.  I'm a firm believer that if he wasn't so scared in the clutch, those Jazz teams could have knocked off the Bulls.  He was the best running big man ever, one of the most well conditioned players ever, and his PNR game with Stockton was one of the most unstoppable plays ever.

Nowitzki probably did the most globally out of all these PFs.  After winning the title, his fame skyrocketed across the world, even after being loved worldwide, especially in Europe.  I'd also venture to say his championship was the most improbable out of any of these PFs.  Against the Blazers, everyone thought Dallas would choke, because they always did (and they collapsed in the Brandon Roy Game 4 masterpiece).  But they pulled it out, and then SWEPT the defending champs, without HCA.  That is impressive in itself.  Then, Dirk single-handedly destroyed the Thunder, and capped off the playoff run by humiliating the Heat.

All that being said, my list goes like this:

Duncan
McHale
Garnett/Malone (it could really go either way)
Nowitzki

McHale rightfully loses points for his lack of longevity, which imo is a huge thing to look at when considering all time greats.

I dont really get your point about his feet. Yeah if no one got injured or aged they could play until they're 40

It's impossible for people to not age.  It is possible for people to have healthy careers.

Strongly disagree about all players being able to pay in to their forties if they stayed healthy.

For example, look at Rondo.  Even if that injury never happens, he still wouldn't last that long in the league (maybe until he's 34 or 35) unless he changes his game.  Whenever a person a ages (especially athletes), they tend to lose athleticism, right?  Rondo, a guy who relies heavily on athleticism, would be a significantly worse player in his later years.  You know why Kidd is still playing?  Because he can pass and shoot.  If he still couldn't shoot, I'd argue he'd be out of the league.  Same goes for Rondo.  That's why this injury scares me so much.  If Rondo loses a chunk of athleticism, he'll never be the great player he has the potential to be.

The reason a guy like McHale could play into his forties is because the way he played would've been unstoppable, whether he was 20 or 40.  His endless array of post moves worked on anybody from when he entered the league to when he was forced to leave it.  What makes you think those moves wouldn't have worked past that time.  I'd bet they would.

And lack of longevity?  Well, then I'd argue KG loses points there.  The guy has a freaking minutes restriction for crying out loud.  Yeah, the argument could be made that he has that because he injured his knee, but then why can't I use that argument for McHale?  It goes both ways.
KG is in his 18th season.  McHale was in the HOF 18 years after he started playing professionally.

Did KG go to college for four years?

Would KG have a ring had he not been traded?

Could KG have been the outright best player on a championship team?

The answer to those questions is no.

I think even if McHale hadn't been on the Celtics, he could've been a champion, if he played with a great second banana (like a Wade to LeBron).  Was KG our best player in 2008?  Probably.  But it was close.  Pierce played at an unreal level all year, and then took it to another level in the postseason.  And going by his years in Minnesota, he couldn't get it done.  Even the year he had a great supporting cast (Cassell and Sprewell), he still couldn't get it done.  Now, I think Cassell got hurt, but shouldn't that mean the star steps it up?

Edit:  in response to your edit:

McHale was a great defender; McHale was as good a rebounder as KG;  while not being near the athlete KG was and is; McHale has an elite jump shot that you had to respect.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: LooseCannon on March 11, 2013, 04:15:58 PM
And lack of longevity?  Well, then I'd argue KG loses points there.  The guy has a freaking minutes restriction for crying out loud.  Yeah, the argument could be made that he has that because he injured his knee, but then why can't I use that argument for McHale?  It goes both ways.

Garnett is in the top ten in minutes played.  Karl Malone is the only PF who allows you to use a lack of longevity argument against Garnett.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: CelticsFan9 on March 11, 2013, 04:21:50 PM
And lack of longevity?  Well, then I'd argue KG loses points there.  The guy has a freaking minutes restriction for crying out loud.  Yeah, the argument could be made that he has that because he injured his knee, but then why can't I use that argument for McHale?  It goes both ways.

Garnett is in the top ten in minutes played.  Karl Malone is the only PF who allows you to use a lack of longevity argument against Garnett.

True, but that doesn't answer my question.

Again, I have no problem with people saying, "If KG doesn't injure that knee in '09, he'd be an even greater player."  I have a problem with people who say that this isn't a valid argument: "If Kevin McHale doesn't break his foot, he'd be an even greater player."  What's the difference?
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: Snakehead on March 11, 2013, 04:23:07 PM
And lack of longevity?  Well, then I'd argue KG loses points there.  The guy has a freaking minutes restriction for crying out loud.  Yeah, the argument could be made that he has that because he injured his knee, but then why can't I use that argument for McHale?  It goes both ways.

Garnett is in the top ten in minutes played.  Karl Malone is the only PF who allows you to use a lack of longevity argument against Garnett.

Good response, hilarious post.  KG just went into the top 10 minutes played!  He was run into the ground in Minny.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: KGs Knee on March 11, 2013, 04:28:48 PM
And lack of longevity?  Well, then I'd argue KG loses points there.  The guy has a freaking minutes restriction for crying out loud.  Yeah, the argument could be made that he has that because he injured his knee, but then why can't I use that argument for McHale?  It goes both ways.

Garnett is in the top ten in minutes played.  Karl Malone is the only PF who allows you to use a lack of longevity argument against Garnett.

True, but http at doesn't answer my question.

Again, I have no problem with people saying, "If KG doesn't injure that knee in '09, he'd be an even greater player."  I have a problem with people who say that this isn't a valid argument: "If Kevin McHale doesn't break his foot, he'd be an even greater player."  What's the difference?

You're right, if one is allowed, the other must also be.

My point I made earlier is, neither should be allowed.  Injuries are a part of your career.  They count against you, fair or not.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: CelticsFan9 on March 11, 2013, 04:31:08 PM
And lack of longevity?  Well, then I'd argue KG loses points there.  The guy has a freaking minutes restriction for crying out loud.  Yeah, the argument could be made that he has that because he injured his knee, but then why can't I use that argument for McHale?  It goes both ways.

Garnett is in the top ten in minutes played.  Karl Malone is the only PF who allows you to use a lack of longevity argument against Garnett.

True, but http at doesn't answer my question.

Again, I have no problem with people saying, "If KG doesn't injure that knee in '09, he'd be an even greater player."  I have a problem with people who say that this isn't a valid argument: "If Kevin McHale doesn't break his foot, he'd be an even greater player."  What's the difference?

You're right, if one is allowed, the other must also be.

My point I made earlier is, neither should be allowed.  Injuries are a part of your career.  They count against you, fair or not.

Alright, so now that we're on the same page, the question becomes why do you think KG was/is better than McHale?

Is it because he won the MVP?  Is it because he has been the best player on a team (despite that team never achieving anything significant other than short-term relevancy)?  Is it because you just like him better?
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: Fafnir on March 11, 2013, 04:33:17 PM
And lack of longevity?  Well, then I'd argue KG loses points there.  The guy has a freaking minutes restriction for crying out loud.  Yeah, the argument could be made that he has that because he injured his knee, but then why can't I use that argument for McHale?  It goes both ways.

Garnett is in the top ten in minutes played.  Karl Malone is the only PF who allows you to use a lack of longevity argument against Garnett.
And before he came to Boston KG never missed games, he was like LeBron with how freakishly healthy he was. All while knocking out 40+ MPG seasons year after year.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: Roy H. on March 11, 2013, 04:33:50 PM
McHale was as good a rebounder as KG;  while not being near the athlete KG was and is

I love McHale, but what is this based upon?  McHale's career high in TRB% (total rebound percentage) is 14.8%.  KG has bested that in 15 out of 18 seasons.

Quote
McHale has an elite jump shot that you had to respect.

Similarly, I wouln't call McHale an "elite" jump shooter, especially by today's standards.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: LooseCannon on March 11, 2013, 04:34:10 PM
And lack of longevity?  Well, then I'd argue KG loses points there.  The guy has a freaking minutes restriction for crying out loud.  Yeah, the argument could be made that he has that because he injured his knee, but then why can't I use that argument for McHale?  It goes both ways.

Garnett is in the top ten in minutes played.  Karl Malone is the only PF who allows you to use a lack of longevity argument against Garnett.

True, but http at doesn't answer my question.

Again, I have no problem with people saying, "If KG doesn't injure that knee in '09, he'd be an even greater player."  I have a problem with people who say that this isn't a valid argument: "If Kevin McHale doesn't break his foot, he'd be an even greater player."  What's the difference?

To be an All-Time Great, you have to perform at a high level for a long period of time.  KG would have an even greater career if he hadn't been injured, but despite that injury, he has been in the game for a very long time while performing at a very high level.

The difference is that KG doesn't need any talk about "what if" to be in the conversation while, arguably, McHale does.  345 games and 17,514 minutes (and counting) matter greatly.  If say that they have played at close to the same level, Garnett has done it for 1.5 times as long, so there's not really a good argument for McHale unless you are believe that McHale was much better or if you are giving championship rings a tremendous weight, something that I would argue is ridiculous in a team sport where you can't single-handedly carry mediocre teammates to a title.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: LooseCannon on March 11, 2013, 04:35:43 PM
And lack of longevity?  Well, then I'd argue KG loses points there.  The guy has a freaking minutes restriction for crying out loud.  Yeah, the argument could be made that he has that because he injured his knee, but then why can't I use that argument for McHale?  It goes both ways.

Garnett is in the top ten in minutes played.  Karl Malone is the only PF who allows you to use a lack of longevity argument against Garnett.

True, but http at doesn't answer my question.

Again, I have no problem with people saying, "If KG doesn't injure that knee in '09, he'd be an even greater player."  I have a problem with people who say that this isn't a valid argument: "If Kevin McHale doesn't break his foot, he'd be an even greater player."  What's the difference?

You're right, if one is allowed, the other must also be.

My point I made earlier is, neither should be allowed.  Injuries are a part of your career.  They count against you, fair or not.

Intangible like that matter if it's close.  I'd argue it's not close if you are looking at entire careers and not just peaks.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: CelticG1 on March 11, 2013, 04:36:13 PM
These mchale and KG comparisons baffle me.

"kG's great cast in Minny" haha. If you want to be a little more credible at least state something like "kg's underrated cast" even tho those guys flat out sucked

At least make a real arguement, something like this:

Mchale was superior offensively, and. Very close defensively as welll as rebounding wise. If his career wasnt cut so short he possibly could have been the greatest pf of all time.

But claiming McHale could have been a number 1 guy (he never was) and saying KG couldnt (he was) for a champuonship team is ludicris. Its also ludicris just ignoring McHales shorter career and just claiming that he would have been better or just as good until he was 40 pretty much out of thin air with no basis whatsoever
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: nickagneta on March 11, 2013, 04:43:23 PM
I see someone said that McHale wasn't a great rebounder because he never averaged 10 per game in his career.

But let's add some context to that. When McHale was playing he usually played alongside Bird, Parish, Maxwell, Walton, and Pinckney. All were very good to elite rebounders. That definitely took away from rebounds that would be available for him.

Remember years like 1984 and 1985? Bird and Parish both played in excess of 34 MPG and both averaged over 10.4 RPG those two years. McHale had 7.5 and 9.0 RPG those two years while playing over 30 MPG.

I contend McHale was an excellent rebounder. He just played in an era where just about every team had an elite rebounder and the Celtics had 3.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: Roy H. on March 11, 2013, 04:51:14 PM
I see someone said that McHale wasn't a great rebounder because he never averaged 10 per game in his career.

But let's add some context to that. When McHale was playing he usually played alongside Bird, Parish, Maxwell, Walton, and Pinckney. All were very good to elite rebounders. That definitely took away from rebounds that would be available for him.

Remember years like 1984 and 1985? Bird and Parish both played in excess of 34 MPG and both averaged over 10.4 RPG those two years. McHale had 7.5 and 9.0 RPG those two years while playing over 30 MPG.

I contend McHale was an excellent rebounder. He just played in an era where just about every team had an elite rebounder and the Celtics had 3.

Eh...  Yes, McHale's rebounds were limited by playing next to Larry and Parish.  However, even in '89 -- when Bird played a total of 6 games -- McHale's TRB% was a pedestrian 12.7%.

I don't think there's any actual evidence that McHale was an excellent rebounder.  His numbers probably would have gone up a bit if he was the best big man on his team, but it was never a particular strength, especially when compared to his peers.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: Eja117 on March 11, 2013, 04:51:19 PM
I see someone said that McHale wasn't a great rebounder because he never averaged 10 per game in his career.

But let's add some context to that. When McHale was playing he usually played alongside Bird, Parish, Maxwell, Walton, and Pinckney. All were very good to elite rebounders. That definitely took away from rebounds that would be available for him.

Remember years like 1984 and 1985? Bird and Parish both played in excess of 34 MPG and both averaged over 10.4 RPG those two years. McHale had 7.5 and 9.0 RPG those two years while playing over 30 MPG.

I contend McHale was an excellent rebounder. He just played in an era where just about every team had an elite rebounder and the Celtics had 3.
It's true that when you look at it that way his numbers are somewhat comparable with Parish and Kareem

Basically if you look at it between their ages of 27-32 you have Bird averaging 8, McHale 9, Parish 10...and Kareem was like 11 and Bill Laimbeer was around 12ish. A very young Malone was like 10, 11
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: nickagneta on March 11, 2013, 05:02:56 PM
I see someone said that McHale wasn't a great rebounder because he never averaged 10 per game in his career.

But let's add some context to that. When McHale was playing he usually played alongside Bird, Parish, Maxwell, Walton, and Pinckney. All were very good to elite rebounders. That definitely took away from rebounds that would be available for him.

Remember years like 1984 and 1985? Bird and Parish both played in excess of 34 MPG and both averaged over 10.4 RPG those two years. McHale had 7.5 and 9.0 RPG those two years while playing over 30 MPG.

I contend McHale was an excellent rebounder. He just played in an era where just about every team had an elite rebounder and the Celtics had 3.

Eh...  Yes, McHale's rebounds were limited by playing next to Larry and Parish.  However, even in '89 -- when Bird played a total of 6 games -- McHale's TRB% was a pedestrian 12.7%.

I don't think there's any actual evidence that McHale was an excellent rebounder.  His numbers probably would have gone up a bit if he was the best big man on his team, but it was never a particular strength, especially when compared to his peers.
After '87 I have to admit his ability to rebound was effected by his bad foot. Sort of like when KG's numbers dipped after his knee injury. I am not saying he was an elite rebounder. He wasn't. But he was excellent and usually surrounded by other excellent rebounders.

For instance, in that 1989 season, Parish had his best rebounding season ever averaging 12.5 per. 2 Celtic guards averaged over 4,6 RPG and Pinckney and Kleine combined had over 10 RPG and a TRB% average of 14.2%.

Still remember watching his work under the boards both offensively and defensively and thought he was an excellent rebounder.
Title: Re: ESPN: Is Garnett an All-Time Great?
Post by: Moranis on March 11, 2013, 10:42:40 PM
I see someone said that McHale wasn't a great rebounder because he never averaged 10 per game in his career.

But let's add some context to that. When McHale was playing he usually played alongside Bird, Parish, Maxwell, Walton, and Pinckney. All were very good to elite rebounders. That definitely took away from rebounds that would be available for him.

Remember years like 1984 and 1985? Bird and Parish both played in excess of 34 MPG and both averaged over 10.4 RPG those two years. McHale had 7.5 and 9.0 RPG those two years while playing over 30 MPG.

I contend McHale was an excellent rebounder. He just played in an era where just about every team had an elite rebounder and the Celtics had 3.

Eh...  Yes, McHale's rebounds were limited by playing next to Larry and Parish.  However, even in '89 -- when Bird played a total of 6 games -- McHale's TRB% was a pedestrian 12.7%.

I don't think there's any actual evidence that McHale was an excellent rebounder.  His numbers probably would have gone up a bit if he was the best big man on his team, but it was never a particular strength, especially when compared to his peers.
After '87 I have to admit his ability to rebound was effected by his bad foot. Sort of like when KG's numbers dipped after his knee injury. I am not saying he was an elite rebounder. He wasn't. But he was excellent and usually surrounded by other excellent rebounders.

For instance, in that 1989 season, Parish had his best rebounding season ever averaging 12.5 per. 2 Celtic guards averaged over 4,6 RPG and Pinckney and Kleine combined had over 10 RPG and a TRB% average of 14.2%.

Still remember watching his work under the boards both offensively and defensively and thought he was an excellent rebounder.
there were a lot more rebounds as whole available in the 80's so take that for its worth, but I think people forget that KG was actually on teams with decent rebounders.  I mean the first year KG hit 10 boards (when he moved from SF to PF really) his RB% was 15.4.  He was also playing with Joe Smith at 14 and Dean Garrett at 13.6.  Both comparable if not better than much of the Bird, Parish, McHale prime years.  The next year KG bumped up to 17.1, but Joe Smith bumped up as well to 14.3 and Nesterovic replaced Garrett (as the third big) and was a respectable 12.8.  Garrett was still on the team at a healthy 13.5.  That 00-01 TWolves team had 5 players above 13.2, KG again led the way at 16.4.

KG was quite simply a vastly superior rebounder to McHale and it wasn't about Parish and Bird, it was quite simply he was just better at it.  Some of that may in fact be because McHale often wasn't defending the post because Parish was better at it then he was so McHale didn't have to guard the opposing teams best big. 

The reality is when you aren't your teams best player you don't have the same pressure and your stats are inflated to the positive.  You don't get the double teams, you don't have to work as hard defensively, etc.  It is just easier and McHale benefitted greatly from that in his career numbers.  For me, as I said he is 5th all time, comfortably ahead of Dirk and the Worm, but well behind Malone, Duncan, Charles, and KG.