The Spurs are significantly better than the Celtics are in virtually every phase of the game and every position.
yeah, I don't see it that way. KG is right there with TD. Pierce is better than Ginobili, and Rondo is capable of playing with TP. The role players are a mixed bag, but none of SAs role players has the upside of Jeff Green.
Danny needs to figure out how to reshape the role players, but I think he is capable of doing that. The #16 pick and the MLE are two key pieces. Add to those trades and I think he can get us a better big man rotation and some size on the perimeter....
I just dont see how you can say KG is right there with Duncan at this point in both their careers.
Duncan averaged 18 and 10 with 3 blocks per game this year in just 30 minutes while shooting 50% from the field.
KG averaged 15 and 8 while shooting just a hiar under 50% and averaged LESS THAN a block per game in the same minutes as Duncan.
As a 37 year old Duncan made first team All NBA and Second team all NBA defense. KG still anchors our teams defense but he has considerably lost a step, especially when compared to Duncan.
Those particular stats are a bit of a dubious comparison, though.
KG has maintained that 'near 50%' FG% while shooting a far higher share of shots from outside than Duncan.
Duncan has always played much closer to the hoop on both offense and defense than KG. He takes a much larger share of his shots within 2-3 feet of the basket. he also normally plays closer under the hoop and along the baseline on defense. That sounds great - and it is certainly not a 'bad thing' that Duncan plays close to the hoop. He gets more close-in high-percentage shots off the post-up or off put-backs. And he's going to get more blocks on defense.
KG, is much more of a 'stretch' big. His role on offense is to pull a defensive big man out of the paint to open it up for others. He's a much better outside shooter than Duncan.
I would argue that KG is actually more versatile overall on offense than Duncan. His utilization is lower over recent years (a product of playing with Pierce and Allen). KG has posted a USG% of around 23% most years, while Duncan has been called on at about a 28% rate. And thus Duncan has taken 2-3 more shots per game. But KG's still been pretty much just as efficient on post-up plays as Duncan, while possessing a much better outside game and the ability to work off the dribble.
KG's shooting percentages from every distance are as good or better than Duncan's. Mostly better. He just doesn't take as many shots as Duncan. Which is more of a function of the teams they each have been on.
Defensively, their roles overlap, but Duncan spends more time defending the low post while KG is one of the best high-paint, P&R defenders, ever. He's also a tremendous show-&-recover help defender on the perimeter.
Defending the high paint doesn't result in exiting counting stats. You aren't in great position for rebounds or blocks. But you disrupt passing lanes and hedge away driving lanes and force oppositions to settle for lower-percentage outside shots. You do get the occasional steal. So while Duncan's block rates are a little higher, KG's steal rates are a little higher.
Duncan has, accordingly, had a slight edge in Defensive Rebound Rate in recent years, but not by much. Both have been among the NBA elite, posting DRB% between 25-30% each year.
Both Duncan and Garnett are great players. In my opinion, they are the two premier power forwards of their generation and among the greatest ever. But they are very different TYPES of power forwards. Duncan is more of a 'classic' PF. Versatile, yes, but with an emphasis on the baseline and low-post game. KG is a different kind of beast, extending the PF game out much further from the basket on both ends.
I think trying to say which is 'better' than the other becomes almost a matter of taste. Depending on what the rest of your team is made up of, one may be more or less valuable than the other.
Topic: The Spurs show we should run it back (Read 23751 times)