According to two separate ESPN reports (and I’m not sure you can label Bill Simmons’s musings a “report,” but I don’t know what else to call it), Kevin Garnett was one of the polarizing forces keeping the NBA players union from reaching a 50-50 agreement (or similar terms) with the owners, a deal that would have ended the NBA lockout. The second report, by Henry Abbott, also listed Paul Pierce and Kobe Bryant as culprits.

We’ll start with Simmons’s account of the events, regardless of how tongue in cheek it may be:

Kevin Garnett, who inexplicably turned into Norma Rae these past few weeks and led the charge to fight the fight and stand strong … without, of course, ever mentioning that his agent was savvy enough to defer a significant amount of money from his last contract extension so that he still has fresh money coming in this season (unlike 95 percent of the players), or that a 50-game regular season would be absolutely perfect for his aching knees, or that losing two months of 2011-12 money might help him with his next contract because he won’t break down during a shortened season (increasing the odds that he’ll get one last lucrative extension next summer).

Should someone who’s earned over $300 million (including endorsements) and has deferred paychecks coming really be telling guys who have made 1/100th as much as him to fight the fightand stand strong and not care about getting paid? And what are Garnett’s credentials, exactly? During one of the single biggest meetings (last week, on Tuesday), Hunter had Kobe Bryant, Paul Pierce and Garnett (combined years spent in college: three) negotiate directly with Stern in some sort of misguided “Look how resolved we are, you’re not gonna intimidate us!” ploy that backfired so badly that one of their teams’ owners was summoned into the meeting specifically to calm his player down and undo some of the damage. (I’ll let you guess the player. It’s not hard.) And this helped the situation … how? And we thought this was going to work … why?

Congratulations, players — you showed solidarity! You showed you wouldn’t back down! You made things worse, and you wasted a day, but dammit, you didn’t back down! Just make sure you tell that to every team employee who gets fired over these next few weeks, as well as to all the restaurant and bar owners near NBA arenas who are taking a massive financial hit through the holidays. I’m sure they will be proud of you.

Simmons’s “report” came out yesterday, and Abbott’s was published today. Abbott quotes Matt Bonner later in the piece, who cautions that the entire account of Abbott’s main story seems dubious. “There’s no way,” Bonner said. The players needed huge convincing just to agree to lower their share of BRI to 53%. Offering to take 50%, or agreeing to such an offer, seemed outrageous to Bonner.

“That was a huge point of contention,” he said. “Talking to all these veterans and all-stars, they were upset we went down to 53. We had to sell them on that. I’m pretty certain [union lawyer Jeffrey] Kessler didn’t have the authority to offer 50, and nobody in the room would have agreed to that.”

Still, Abbott published a report claiming that Garnett, Pierce and Bryant might have torpedoed an approaching deal and built a moat between the two sides. Pierce was wearing his packpack, which was apparently a bad sign, for reasons unstated.

As Stern has recounted a dozen times since, not long after what was supposed to have been the hallway conversation that saved the season, something odd and wholly unexpected happened. There was a knock on the door where Stern was selling his owners on the idea. The players wanted to talk.

When they convened, instead of the union’s head, Hunter, or their negotiating committee of Maurice Evans, Matt Bonner, Roger Mason, Theo Ratliff, Etan Thomas and Chris Paul, representing the players were Fisher, Kessler, and three superstars who had been to very few of the meetings at all: Kevin Garnett, Paul Pierce and Kobe Bryant.

A bad sign: Pierce was still wearing his backpack.

The players had two pieces of news that shocked the league: 50/50 was not good enough. And there was nothing further to discuss.

“We had a large group of owners,” remembers Silver, “who had flown in and were prepared to negotiate around the clock.”

More importantly, they had made an aggressively good offer, the NBA’s leaders thought, the one that might get them in trouble with their owners but surely not with the players.

And players who hadn’t even been in the talks, and who seemed not to be on the same page with the crew that had endured more than 40 meetings, had been the ones to reject the best offer the league was likely to have, and to end the best day of negotiations prematurely.

What in the hell was going on? How had they so misread the situation? And where was Billy Hunter? Who spoke for the union? Should the league have been negotiating with Kevin Garnett all along?

Later the league would suggest that the talks had fallen apart because the union happened to have some particularly strident players show up that day.

Maybe it’s as simple as that. Or maybe it’s much more complicated.

Abbott then went on to wonder whether players were inspired by Lebron James’s decision and now believe themselves capable of acting “fully empowered.” As if Michael Jordan — No. 1 in your hearts, Roster 99 in your video games — was not fully empowered.

“It’s a business revolution with young black men, basketball players, in the corner offices. A new way of doing things, long overdue, and happening now,” wrote Abbott.

“And maybe that’s what Stern encountered in that hotel room in New York: A new generation of fully empowered players who no longer believe they have to conform to much of anything.”

Maybe. Or maybe Stern just encountered a trio of stars looking out for future generations, who didn’t want to sign off on a bum deal.

"Congrats, Rajon. Weve earned the Schuhmann stamp of approval!"

According to NBA.com’s John Schuhmann, both Rajon Rondo and Kevin Garnett should be named to the NBA’s First Team All-Defense.

Here’s what he said about Rondo:

Rondo still isn’t the most disciplined defender, but with some encouragement from Doc Rivers, he’s done a better job of staying in front of his man. With long arms, strong hands, quick feet and great anticipation, he’s always been a disruptive force in the backcourt.

The opposing point guards on our list shoot slightly below average against Boston, but the Celtics’ biggest strength defensively is forcing turnovers. And the league leader in steals is responsible for a good amount of those.

And KG:

The one defensive play by Garnett that stands out from this season is probably not one he’d like to be remembered for. Rashard Lewis drove baseline around Garnett for the game-winning bucket in the final seconds of the Magic’s 96-94 win over the Celtics on Jan. 28 in Orlando, in front of a national TNT audience. For some observers, that play summarized how the Celtics have fallen off since they won the championship two years ago.

But Boston’s problems are more about the other end of the floor. They’re still an elite defensive team, and though his mobility has been limited, Garnett is still the biggest reason why. The Celtics have allowed just 97.2 points per 100 possessions with Garnett on the floor. That’s the second lowest on-court efficiency in the league among players who have logged at least 1,200 minutes.

I’m not going to spend much time discussing Rondo.  He deserves first team, absolutely.  It isn’t just that he gets steals, it’s how he gets them, and what he does with them afterward.  He is more disruptive than any other player in the NBA, and quite possibly the quickest to loose balls.  He doesn’t just go after steals, he attacks them.  And, once he gets them, he’s headed off the other way to get his team a bucket.  He still spends a little too much time gambling, but the Celtics can live with it because of all the good that comes from his gambles.

Now, on to Garnett.  I was — how should I say this? — very surprised to see his name on Schuhmann’s first team.  If you’ve watched Garnett play this year, you know he isn’t nearly as quick as he used to be.   Once masterful at moving his feet and staying in front of people, Garnett has been roasted by the likes of Kris Humphries, Al Harrington, Rashard Lewis, and Matt Bonner this season.  KG used to be able to match up with anyone, from point guards to center, and I’m not even exaggerating.  He would pick up point guards fullcourt, then switch back onto a center and make his life miserable in the post.  And he’d play great team defense, too.

Now, the team defense is the only part of KG’s defensive repertoire that keeps him a weapon when the C’s opponent has the ball.  He’s still as good as any player in the league as a team defender.  He has unbelievably active hands, and always seems to deflect and disrupt passes in the lane.  He rotates well, shows on screens, and always seems to be in the right place to affect a play.

But can you really put someone on the First Team All-Defense team, when he struggles to stay in front of his man?  As good as KG remains as a team defender, he’s become nothing more than average when defending the ball.  He’s not as bad as certain clips would lead you to believe, but he’s far from lockdown.

And, in my opinion at least, “far from lockdown” defenders shouldn’t make First Team All-Defense, no matter how helpful they are to their teams.  At this point, Garnett’s defense is similar to Larry Bird’s in Bird’s prime:  Great help defenders, terrific position defenders, but too slow laterally to shut down the opponent’s best player.  And Larry never made better than Second Team.

It pains me to say, but Garnett isn’t as elite a defender as he used to be, and doesn’t deserve First Team honors.

Second Team?  Maybe.

Look at that wide, square base. Solid balance, here. Very solid.

We’ve known all season long that Kevin Garnett isn’t Kevin Garnett.  When he first returned, I tried to pretend he was back to normal when I saw him rise for alley oops and drain midrange jumpers in the preseason, but I was only kidding myself.  Garnett hasn’t been himself all season.  Not even close.  He’s rounding into shape, but since when does he get beat so often defensively?  Since when does he let rebounds fall into an opponent’s hand, rather than his own?  Since when is he not the most dominant player on both ends of the floor?

We all want Garnett to be the KG we knew, loved and celebrated with two seasons ago.  We want him to slap 26 and 14 on Los Angeles in game six, and we want to see that absurd, hanging, one-handed bank shot one more time.  We want him to wave in an opposing point guard’s face as KG hounds him down the floor, close enough to smell the flavor of the point guard’s gum.  We want him nailing jumpers, and making that patented move of his down low.  Both feet firmly on the floor, to keep his pivot.  Head, shoulder, and ball fake one way, keeping both feet firmly on the ground.  Got to keep both pivot feet available. Defender goes one way, KG pivots the other, and it’s over.  His shot is up, and it’s going in. Cash.

But Garnett isn’t reviving from his half-dead state.  It’s not going to happen.  Garnett has become what he will be: An effective, but not dominant, second fiddle.  Maybe even third fiddle.  Fourth?  He is no longer the C’s best player, and he won’t be ever again.

Doc Rivers says KG’s turned the corner and is playing well, but there’s something missing: his balance.

“Whatever corner that is,” he said. “I think Kevin’s fine. He still doesn’t have great balance down low. When he gets hit, I think he loses his balance. Other than that, I think everything else is back.”

Is it that simple?  Is it just his balance?

Because, to me, everything looks a little off.  He can’t jump as high.  How many alley-oops has Garnett missed the season?  More than he missed combined during his previous 14 years, I’d be willing to wager.  He can’t move as quickly laterally.  How many times have you seen Garnett get beat?  He used to get in a frenzied state and harass point guards full-court, damn it.  Now, he can’t even stay in front of Matt Bonner.

Is that all attributable to his balance?  Is it really all the balance?

Something tells me no.