Who was the best saxophone player that played for Miles?

Why do people say Garnett is miles better than Dirk when it's more than debatable? (Read info)?

• Read this and tell me if a fair fan who watched both of their career's would see either has an argument over the other, and it's close. This is just for people who exaggerate and say "KG by a mile". It's not true, I watched their entire career's. For the record, I think either has an argument over the other, but it's biased and ignorant imo to say KG is miles better than Dirk. It's debatable. I don't understand why some act like Garnett is way better than him when that simply isn't true. KG is more complete than him, but he isn't the better player. When the pressure is on, and when you need them most, Dirk has proven to be the more reliable player. Lets look at their career elimination game numbers to see who steps up when you need them most. Kevin Garnett in career elimination games, when his team's season is on the line averages: (19.2ppg, 42%fg, and 12.4rpg) for his career. Dirk's career elimination game numbers are: 28.7ppg, 11.7rpg, 49%fg, 39%3pt, 89%ft (13 30+ point elimination games, which only Jerry West and Wilt Chamberlain have accomplished). In 2002, when Garnett was in his prime, and Dirk was young and before his prime, Dirk got the better of him in their only playoff matchup. 2002 1st round: (Mavs swept Wolves) Dirk: 33.3ppg, 15.7rpg, 53%fg, 77%3pt, 89%ft KG: 24ppg, 18.7rpg, 43%fg, 50%3pt, 72%ft Playoffs: Dirk: 26ppg, 10.4rpg, 2.6apg, 46%fg, 38%3pt, 89%ft (Dirk is one of 4 players in NBA history along with Hakeem, Baylor, and Pettit to average 25/10 for his playoff career). KG: 19.6ppg, 11.1rpg, 3.8apg, 47%fg, 30%3pt, 78%ft Dirk has been the better playoff performer for their career's. He's been better in elimination games when you need him most. And KG in huge pressure games (as shown above) was kind of average to below average most of the time with the exception of a few great games. Dirk has consistently played at a super elite level during pressure playoff games. KG didn't win a ring until he joined Pierce and Allen. And while KG was the "most complete" player for the Celtics, he needed a true closer like Pierce to close out big games (like the 2008 finals, and the 41pt game 7 vs LeBron in rd 2). Dirk proved he can be the legit closer on a championship team. The 2011 Mavs went 2-7 when Dirk got injured, and he came back, and the same team won the championship in which he outplayed Durant, Wade, LBJ, and Kobe all in one playoff run. The 2011 Mavs became only the 5th team in the history of the NBA to win a title with only one allstar, and usually teams that win titles don't have one star with a bunch of good players. They have big 3's/ dynamic duos (Pierce-KG-Allen, TD-Manu-Parker, Kobe-Gasol, Kobe-Shaq, Wade-Shaq, Bird-Parish,Mchale, Magic-Worthy-Kareem, Wilt-West, Russell-Hondo-Cousy, etc etc). I understand KG is more well rounded. He's a much, much better defender. He's a better passer, although Dirk is a good passer as well. KG is a superior rebounder also. But Dirk contributes in ways that don't show in stats, such as luring shotblockers from the hoop so teammates drive without being blocked (which helped Barea dominate in the playoffs). He creates matchup problems like in the Lakers series when the Lakers had to downsize and use Odom to play Dirk for most of the game and the Lakers lost their size and rebounding advantage since they couldn't abuse the Pau-Bynum lineup since traditional bigs don't guard Dirk well. He presents this issue for opposing teams all the time. While Garnett is "more well rounded", i'm taking Dirk for being more unstoppable offensively, presenting the matchup issues, opening up the court for his teammates, and being way more reliable in pressure situations over KG. More complete doesn't = better player. Forgot to add that Dirk is one of 4 players in league history to lead his team to 10 straight 50 win seasons along with Bill Russell, Magic Johnson, and Tim Duncan. KG's argument over Dirk = He's a way better defender, better passer, and rebounder. Dirk's = He's more versatile and unstoppable on offense. He makes his teammates better luring shot blockers from the hoop which spreads the floor for wider passing lanes and allows them to drive without being blocked. He forces teams to downsize to guard him which hurts their size and rebounding advantages. And he's more clutch and dependable in pressure games.

• Answer:

  I think Dirk and KG are close offensively and Dirk is a better scorer. I have always thought Dirk's advantage is range. KG is also a mismatch in the mid-long range (not including 3pt). And in the low post Garnett is better. They both are tall shooters that you can't block and they can fade away. That said, KG is much better than Dirk defensively. They are both big bodies you can throw at the other team's scorer because they are hard to shoot over so they aren't really bad, but when it comes to team defense I have seen Garnett lift the whole team up to another level. I haven't watched much of KG with the Wolves, but in Boston it was CLEAR how poor the team is defensively without him playing. Just like you said Dirk does things offensively that stats don't cover (which I agree with), KG does that in defense. So as great as Dirk is, I think Garnett is the best PF to ever play the game. He spent most of his career in the wrong system I think (didn't watch him that much though) and that affects careers.