5 reasons Tim Duncan was better than Kevin Garnett
Here’s why Tim Duncan was a better player than Kevin Garnett.
The NBA is going to feel weird without Tim Duncan and Kevin Garnett. Many fans completely forget what basketball was like before Garnett and Duncan. They represent an era of dominant power forwards. Both will eventually go into the Hall of Fame and they’ll likely go in together.
However, there have been multiple debates about who the better player is. Both sides have pretty good points. Moreover, both players are among the greatest of all-time. But the debate isn’t as close as many believe. Duncan is a superior player to Garnett in virtually every way. Here are the five reasons why.
5. Duncan won championships
In today’s culture, a strong focus is put on winning championships. Whether it’s a good thing or a bad thing is a debate for another day. But society celebrates those who bring home championships and disdains those who don’t. While Garnett did win a championship with the Boston Celtics, Duncan is one of the greatest postseason players ever with five titles.
It’s fun to discuss hypotheticals. Perhaps if Glen Taylor and Danny Ainge weren’t buddies, Garnett goes to the Lakers instead of the Celtics. Surely Garnett wins more than one ring with Kobe Bryant and potentially Marc Gasol. But in reality, Duncan has the significant upper hand over Garnett in titles.
More on FanSided:
Duncan’s dominance shouldn’t be judged just by titles. He saved his best performances for the postseason. While both Garnett and Duncan were phenomenal in the playoffs, Duncan averaged 20.6 points per game and 11.4 rebounds per game. Garnett averaged 18.2 points per game and 10.7 rebounds per game.
Sure, Duncan had a better team around him. But he was the closest thing the Spurs had to a star. The only reason Duncan wasn’t really a typical superstar was because, well, he didn’t want to be one.