No, he was not a better defender than Robinson, those Wolves teams were never among the top 5 defensively and I don't want to hear about roster either because Robinson had some decrepit ass teams around him when his squad was number 1 in the league defensively. If you're that good defensively, as a big man your impact should be felt on team defense. Oh word, so you're saying Garnett was one of the best zone defenders, even though Robinson never had the benefit of playing his prime years with the zone? Yeah, that's a fair comparison, what we know is that the Spurs were the top defensive team several times with Robinson as the anchor, and were rountinely among the top 10 before Duncan got there. meanwhile KG wasn't apart of a top 10 defensive team until 2003-2004.
Yes, the T'Wolves were not top 5 defensively and the closest they got was in 2004, when they were ranked top 6. This is also the year that he finally got some help, what does this tell you? Or what do you believe happened when he arrived in Boston? And lead that team to the greatest defensive rating in league history, what exactly does that tell you? Did he magically turn into a monster defensively late in his career? Why exactly are Boston so great defensively? Why are the Nets several points better per a 100 possessions defensively with KG on the floor?
Garnett was a better defender in Minny, yet he only anchored top defenses late in his career. This is because it takes a competent team to be a top defense, it does NOT take a player. You can't have Flip Saunders as a coach and a bunch of d-leaguers and expect KG to lead a top 5 defense, that's laughable. Not even Bill Russell would be able to do that. You're focusing on team results, which is stupid when there is on/off data on KGs impact defensively. There are advanced stats like RAPM that shows that KG was the best defender of his generation and would easily slide him into a top 3 defender of all-time. Like I said, DRob was fantastic defensively, one of the best of all-time. But Garnett was overall more impactful defensively.
I also like how you completely disregard anything Garnett did with Boston defensively, why are you not using those teams as examples for great defenses his lead? They were routinely in the top 5 and that's with KG anchoring the defense. What do you think would've happened if he played with a team like Boston in his prime / peak?
Of course you don't care, they are so lopsided in the Admiral's favor that they have to be thrown out, right?
No, because blocks and steals are horrible ways to measure defensive impact. It's the reason why Camby has won a DPOY. You don't want to base your argument on those stats.
KG was a 6.5ppg, 6.6rpg 44% player this year, Robinson at the same age was an 8.5ppg, 7.9rpg, 1.7bpg 47%, so how exactly is that not better than KG?
Eh, minutes per game, why do you not comprehend that it matters? Also, postseason numbers? Look at KG, his PER is over 20 this postseason. Also, Garnett measured out as the 2nd best defender in the league this year, behind Larry Sanders (who only played like 20 games) according to adjusted +/- . I don't look at ppg, rpg and bpg to make a judgement on a player, especially when you refuse to place numbers within its context.
I see a lot of excuses and qualifiers, fact is Robinsons career rebound percentage is higher
So longevity only matters when the stats end up in favor of KG apparently? If longevity were truly that important why are you trying to narrow down their rebound rates to just the prime years, and not the entire scope of their careers? Robinson played with Rodman and Duncan which makes that career rate even more impressive, since he still pulled down boards, who exactly did KG play with that could steal boards from him like the Worm or Fundamental?
I'm not sure if you're joking with me or not at this point. Do you not realize that it matters that Garnett came out of high school, while DRob joined the NBA when he was 24 and therefore has played 400 more games than KG at the same age? How does this not matter? You're using rebounding percentage over the course of their career and that is absoutely stupid considering Garnett came in younger AND played as a small forward his first two years. Honestly, I thought you was a knowledgeable poster. How can you refuse to accept that Garnett was the better rebounder? Its facts. Garnett has the higher rebounding percentage over his prime / peak. You're basically penalizing Garnett for coming in early in the league, which is just stupid.
Robinson shot a higher percentage for his career, couldn't careless if KG was a better shooter from 19 feet away, the fact he took so many jumpers is why he was never on Tim Duncan's level to begin with. It's also why Robinson isn't on Shaq's level, he took too many jumpers compared to someone that feasted in the paint.
Are you really using shooting stats from after Robinson had his hernia? And more importantly, you're using them from 16-23 feet
The bulk of Robinson's jumpers during his prime were 15 and in, even the stats you're using shows he took twice as many shots from 10-15 feet that he did from 16-23 feet. This is part of the reason why KG couldn't get it done on his own, he lived and died with 16-23 foot jumpers, you think this is a good thing? Dude was attempting 300+ 16-23 foot jumpers
and even took 400+ in 03.
I don't want my center to be an exceptional 16-23 ft shooter
Ok, this just shows that you don't understand the importance of spacing. Yes, in todays league you absolutely want your bigs to be able to shoot the ball. Its the reason why prime Garnett measures out so well offensively in advanced stats, he's basically having an elite impact and that has alot to do with his ability to shoot. Just the threat of him being able to hit jumpers makes defenses stretch out which leads to open lanes for perimeter players. This is basic stuff. You don't want your PF clogging up the lane, which is exactly what he didn't. Garnett was ahead of his time with his game, look at all the PFs coming in to todays league, they try to play like KG.
I understand that DRobs game worked very well in the 90s. It really did. But Garnetts offensive game is built for the league he's playing in. Both of them did were really good offensive players.
Throwback TNT music @ 3:25...So soulful!