The article, frankly, is silly reactionary hyperbole after a couple of tough series - that the Celtics won.
I've seen them all, and suggesting Garnett isn't "clutch" is simply not supported by the facts. He's been critical on the offensive end to numerous Celtics wins. I wonder if Simmons was paying attention to game 7 with the Cavs: Garnett had two important buckets down the stretch. Plus, can anyone honestly say they didn't want the basketball in Pierce's hands down the stretch? Again, the facts do not support Simmons' assertion.
Plus, boiling "clutch" down to offense is a gross oversimplification. Garnett's intensity does at times get the best of him. But it also is the fuel for the best defensive team in the league, and it's the fuel for the best defender in the league. If you believe the premise of this article, then you believe that a basket is more important than a blocked shot or a stop. I challenge you to find any professional basketball man to accept that premise. There's more to the game than points scored, and this piece makes me wonder if Simmons understands that.
This is a piece for people who don't want to think about the game of basketball in the complete sense. If offense is all you care about, then EVERY player who ever misfired in a key moment isn't "clutch."
This article is a waste of bandwidth.