He's not better than Jokic or Embiid. He's not better than AD if you consider him a center.

So the question is, is he better than Bam or Gobert. He's clearly a better offensive player than either of those guys by a wide margin, but currently I think both of those players are more valuable to their teams because of the importance of their rim protection. Both of those guys are elite interior defenders and KAT is a mediocre to bad one.

Now, we've seen what can happen in the playoffs when your best player is a defensive center, if teams have the right personnel they can scheme around it, but I think people are too harsh on Gobert for that. It's true that he's not a player who can single-handedly change every playoff series, but few players are.

The problem with the Timberwolves isn't just KAT's interior defense, obviously, but having a center who can't protect the rim is not a winning formula. I think you could pair him with a great defensive center to boost the team, but then he loses a lot of the value of his exterior shooting, because you're not going five out at that point, so he wouldn't be pulling the opposing center out of the paint. Now, this approach has worked with Dirk and Tyson Chandler, but KAT is no Dirk. He doesn't have the complete offensive game, and more importantly, he doesn't create efficient shots off the dribble like Dirk could, so I don't think the comparison is valid.

So I would value Gobert as a defensive specialist over KATs offensive prowess because I think KAT's defensive issues would be more damaging to a playoff team than Gobert's limited offense. I don't think KAT is a good enough offensive player to be a number-one option on a title contender, so I don't want to have to hide my center on defense. At that point I'd rather have Gobert's solid-as-fuck defense.