drza44
12p8 comments posted · 0 followers · following 0
14 years ago @ Celtics Town - Kevin Garnett an undes... · 0 replies · +1 points
14 years ago @ Celtics Town - Kevin Garnett an undes... · 0 replies · +1 points
One difference this year is that could support your point is that a slightly higher percentage of KG's shots are assisted than before (82% this year, vs 74% last year, vs 68% in '08). But as I said to Jay above, that could easily be an effect of the team wanting him to be a finisher as opposed to an initiator as Rondo has come into his own to handle a larger amount of the offense initiation. There's a difference between DOESN'T create as much and CAN'T create as much individually. Seems to me that the pick-and-pops/pin downs lead to high percentage shots for a larger number of people than anyone going iso...so it's hard for me to find fault in something that leads to high percentage scoring for the team.
As for the value vs production argument, I would say that Garnett has been (at the least) a key member of the Celtics for 23 of their 28 wins this year. Not only is that the vast majority of their wins, it is also more wins than all but 3 other teams in the East. If he's produced enough to contribute in such a strong way to such a large number of wins, I don't see how # of games played can really be used as an argument against him.
14 years ago @ Celtics Town - Kevin Garnett an undes... · 2 replies · +1 points
Is he the same right now as he used to be? Of course not. But he used to be the best player in the league. That's too high of a standard to be used for criterion for an All Star game. Even as he is, he still has a huge qualitative effect that is very well supported by quantitative evidence. That is much more relevant to the discussion than what Garnett used to be able to do. What he currently is able to do still makes him an All Star.
And actually, yeah, Garnett does get relied upon to score in crunch time when healthy. I know you hate numbers, but again there's a website that keeps track of how players do in the last 5 minutes of games that are within 5 points. In those situations, in the last 3 years Pierce, Garnett and Allen all split the scoring fairly evenly. This year, Rondo has joined them as a 4th option that does a lot of crunch time scoring.
The Celtics are championship contenders primarily because of their defense, and Garnett is by-far the best defensive player on the team. They round that out with a strong offense as well, and Garnett is also one of the key offensive performers on a similar order to the other key guys. Put that together, and he's still the best player on the team. Or at the very least, he deserves to be an All Star. As I said, I hope he has several of his teammates there with him, and if you think they're better more power to you. KG still deserves to be an All Star, though.
14 years ago @ Celtics Town - Kevin Garnett an undes... · 0 replies · +1 points
Defensively, this isn't a contest even with Garnett slowed from what he used to be. I would rather have Perk guard Howard, or Shaq, or any other huge/explosive scoring center...a population that includes at most 10% of the big men in the league. The other 90% of the bigs, which includes just about every power forward and a good chunk of the centers in the league, I'd rather have Garnett on in 1-on-1 situations. And team-wise, as you point out, Garnett is still by far the best defender that we have and the only reason that Thibs' defensive scheme works.
On the whole, when both offense and defense are factored in, there aren't any other Celtics that have meant more to the team's wins than Garnett. I have no problem with Pierce and Rondo also being on the team, in fact I hope that's how it works out. But to say that Garnett doesn't deserve to be an All Star or that he's a role player now, despite all of the quantitative and observational evidence to the contrary, that's what I don't agree with.
14 years ago @ Celtics Town - Kevin Garnett an undes... · 4 replies · +1 points
But that isn't the case for the Celtics. Garnett has a small lead in PER. Garnett has the lead in win shares/minute. Garnett has the lead in +/-. Etc. All of these stats, that all come from different angles, all come to the same result.
And again, it doesn't have to rely sole-ly (or even primarily) upon composite advanced stats. Basic team stats also support the huge difference Garnett makes. The eyeball test is cool, but we both have described what our eyeballs tell us and our eyeballs don't agree. Failing that, I would think quantitative analysis would be a logical second step. If you don't like my numbers, give me something else to work with besides just "my opinion is different than yours, and there isn't anything in the world that can make me think otherwise." I mean, how the heck are we supposed to have a constructive discussion like that? Unless "agree to disagree" is just the outcome that you prefer?
14 years ago @ Celtics Town - Kevin Garnett an undes... · 0 replies · +1 points
As for the stats being arbitrary or concocted, again, we don't have to use any that you have a beef with. You don't like PER? That's fine. Win shares doesn't float your boat? Cool. Same with Roland rating, or whatever else one you can think of. But I do think it's worth noting that all of them tell the same story...even in the counter-intuitive situations that you point out, rarely do you have a case where just about all of the advanced stats across the board say the same thing and have it really be shocking or difficult to support.
But even if you leave those stats out, things like the defense giving up 91.8 points/game on 43.8% shooting with Garnett and 98.9 points on 46.2% without him...those aren't stats that you need a mathematician for. And again, if something shows up pretty clearly on my eye-test, shows up in even the most rudimentary numerical analysis, and ALSO is supported by the more advanced stuff...to me that's a lot stronger than just saying, "well my eye test disagrees" and leaving it at that.
14 years ago @ Celtics Town - Kevin Garnett an undes... · 9 replies · +1 points
You scoff at my use of advanced stats, but in reality all I'm using them for is to support my "eye test". My eye test tells me that Garnett , even in his injury-returning state, completely transforms our defense from "average-or-below" to "best in the league". That isn't something you mention as an aside or minimize. Considering that defense is THE focal point of this team, that the only reason this team has championship aspirations is because of their defense, then being the key and focal point to said defense alone would make Garnett probably the most important player on the team.
And that's not even considering offense, where again Garnett's impact is obvious to my eye test. By far the most successful offensive sets that the Celtics run are 2-man sets featuring KG. The out-top pick-and-roll with Pierce that is almost guaranteed to get one of them a good shot, the side pick-and-roll with Rondo that either results in an open shot for them or a teammate as it collapses the defense, the pin-down pick that KG sets that either opens up Allen/House for wide-open wing/elbow treys or leaves Garnett in favorable position to score down low. These aren't "small" parts of the offense...when the team is playing well, they are the STAPLE of the offense. And despite Perk's improvements and Sheed's shooting/passing abilities, they are things that just can't be replicated when Garnett isn't in the game.
That's what MY eyeball test tells me. And as mentioned before, the advanced stats just support my opinion. It's why KG has the highest PER or win shares/min on the team, it's why his +/- is so good, it's why the team's scoring differential is 9 points better when he's on the court than when he's off. It's why the team was 21-5 when he first got hurt and is 6-8 since then. He is the best player, the straw that stirs the drink, on what is the best team in the league when he's healthy. He pretty clearly deserves to be an All Star.
14 years ago @ Celtics Town - Kevin Garnett an undes... · 1 reply · +1 points