Minnesota Sports Forum

Have this team in the playoffs?

Without who? Towns, Wiggins, both?

YES - If he was addition without subtraction. He might be considered the 3rd best player on this team.

How good of a lineup of Marbury, LaVine, Wiggins, KG, and Towns be?

bleedspeed177 wrote:YES - If he was addition without subtraction. He might be considered the 3rd best player on this team.

How good of a lineup of Marbury, LaVine, Wiggins, KG, and Towns be?

Whoa.

Don't know about that. Garnett's greatness was in just how versatile he was. And that includes being a plus player (to very good to eventually exceptional) on both sides of the court. While I'm on record that he would have been the best second fiddle in basketball history... I wouldn't consider even a young KG as the 3rd best player on a 24 - 34 team.

That's a disservice to just how good he was both offensively and defensively.



[Note: Anybody hear the Rip Hamilton and Kevin McHale conversation yesterday? Rip brought up how his agent told him he was going to be drafted by the Wolves. The Wolves took Wally instead. He asked McHale what happened...

"I screwed up."

Then, McHale went on to rip Wally a bit to the point that Hamilton and Billups had to chime in with "Well, Wally was pretty good, too. He wasn't THAT bad." I found it amusing. ]

He would have been the heart of the defense for sure, but I think Towns and Wiggins would have been the heart of the offense. They would have been crazy trio.

bleedspeed177 wrote:He would have been the heart of the defense for sure, but I think Towns and Wiggins would have been the heart of the offense. They would have been crazy trio.

To be fair, keeping the ball out of Garnet's hands on offense would probably be a bit of a travesty.

His on-court unselfishness was legendary.



[Note: Asshole in the locker room? Sure. Probably. ]

Look at his stats.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/g/garneke01.html

18.5ppg, 9.6rbp, and 4.2 assists. Shot 49%. in 40 minutes a night. I think he would have been 3rd leg on this team. It is crazy to think that.

I guess it's how we're looking at it...

Best player?
Or most shots?

We all praise G for his do it all, team first attitude at the PF position, imagine KG in his place! :-o

Without having to be the center of the team on both ends KG could really excel being the defensive anchor on one end while being the selfless player he always was on offense. I think KG's fire alone would make him the alpha dog even with KAT and Wig as his partners and regardless of what the box score says.

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

bleedspeed177 wrote:YES - If he was addition without subtraction. He might be considered the 3rd best player on this team.

How good of a lineup of Marbury, LaVine, Wiggins, KG, and Towns be?

Whoa.

Don't know about that. Garnett's greatness was in just how versatile he was. And that includes being a plus player (to very good to eventually exceptional) on both sides of the court. While I'm on record that he would have been the best second fiddle in basketball history... I wouldn't consider even a young KG as the 3rd best player on a 24 - 34 team.

That's a disservice to just how good he was both offensively and defensively.



[Note: Anybody hear the Rip Hamilton and Kevin McHale conversation yesterday? Rip brought up how his agent told him he was going to be drafted by the Wolves. The Wolves took Wally instead. He asked McHale what happened...

"I screwed up."

Then, McHale went on to rip Wally a bit to the point that Hamilton and Billups had to chime in with "Well, Wally was pretty good, too. He wasn't THAT bad." I found it amusing. ]

I saw part of that clip it was good stuff. If Wally coulda stayed healthy he was a nice player. Who woulda thought a scorer and skinny Rip would learn to play defense?