More than anyone other than maybe Garnett, I think Duncan really blurred the line. If a young Hakeem were drafted by the Spurs instead of Duncan, we'd probably be talking about The Dream as the greatest PF of all time. He was really only about 6'10, and started his career at PF next to Sampson. Houston just never had somebody else who could man the center position after Sampson left, and Hakeem had no problem guarding guys like Shaq. (Unlike Duncan.) I think a lot of what we call the center position now has been defined by Shaq. If you had a guy like Garnett or Duncan or whoever on your team, you knew that guy was going to foul out trying to guard Shaq. So you got yourself a series of really big stiffs to put beside your elite big man, and you told the elite big man he was a PF and only put him on Shaq in specific situations. The interesting thing is now we're kind of going back to the good old days. Amare is listed at Center. Howard is a center. If Shaq were still in his prime, I think those two guys are suddenly power forwards on the All Star ballot.
He is hard to place in that group because he was surrounded by so much talent. He wasn't a great rebounder; was an efficient, but not volume scorer . . . I sure like watching him play though.
OK, here's the case for Malone: He is what a PF should be - strong, able to score, able to rebound. He could pick and roll or pick and pop. 2nd greatest scorer ever. A rock. Rarely was hurt. Dedicated. Hard worker. 14-time All-Star, a 2-time MVP, 14-time All-NBA player, 2nd most minutes in league history. "Every play, every rebound," said James Worthy, "you are going to have to go harder than you would go against anybody else in the league." Duncan just seems a tad softer to me, great of course, but a PF is supposed to be a stud. Malone looks and plays like what you would want from a prototypical power forward.
Malone had more attitude, and that chiseled physique combined with a ruthless pair of elbows meant that nobody, ever, was going to call The Mailman "soft." I'd say Duncan was just as relentless, but he just had different physical tools at his disposal (more height and athleticism, non-existent biceps). Woody Allen and Bruce Willis have both probably been laid by a similar number of incredibly hot women. One guy just looks it more than the other. In my analogy, Malone is Willis and Allen is Duncan.
I think Malone and Duncan are very close. Malone was the better scorer, they were similarly good rebounders. Duncan was a superior team defender, but Malone may have actually been the better individual defender. He was much harder to move in the post. Malone had an absurdly long prime and productive career. He played 19 seasons productively, 16-17 of them at essentially star-level. Duncan has played 12 years, at star-level. I consider their peaks and primes to be relatively equal and give Malone the edge on career value, for now. Duncan may match that career value...he's still going quite strong, though he may be starting to break down.
KG! Best overall big man ever, Duncan gets the nod as best PF with all the rings and whatnot, but if we are going most skilled, gotta be kg
Tim Duncan is NOT better than Malone and I loathe Malone. Don't bring up the rings crap either, Duncan doesn't get any in that era anyways. Not to mention Duncan had much better talent around him..look back on those late 90's Jazz teams, they sucked outside of Malone. Stockton was declining, Horny was still a sharp shooter, but Antione Carr, Greg Ostertag, Shandon Anderson, Bryon Russell, Howard Eisley, are you kidding me?
and he didn't win, what's your point? look at all the crap around kg, doesn't mean he is a winner because they went to the playoffs 8 straight times. Your argument makes little sense. I think bringing championships into the equation is a little unfair anyway. Wade has 1 ring, that doesn't instantly make him better than other elite guards without one. It just says that he AND his team stepped up. Guys like KG and barkley never had that chance (until KG got traded anyway), so i would argue that malone isn't as good because he was there so many times and didn't win while Duncan and his team made the most of their chances.
Funny, I've never considered Duncan a PF but only a Center because of the way he plays the game. Just me! I voted Malone, with McHale getting consideration. If having to include Duncan - he'd get consideration also. Malone was the BOMB though. Period.
I voted Duncan. Partly out of blind homerism, admittedly and obviously. Malone was a great PF, no doubt, but Duncan has the jewelry.
I'd put a couple more periods after yours. He was a great player no doubt... he was also an all time game 7 choker, Vlade-esk flopper, blatant cheap shot artist (sending many players to the hospital), and an off the charts scumbag in his personal life. Dude impregnated a 13 year old while in college! While making millions he was a deadbeat dad to many, strong arming the various poor mom's he'd saddled with his offspring with an army of lawyers. Also he was regularly a whiny bitch about his contract situation calling out management and ownership in the press. Duncan has been at least his match statistically, is much better on D, and has come through in the clutch time and again. Those rings are his legacy just like Karl's choke jobs are his. And not that it's front and center when addressing a question like this, but the things I've heard about him off the court is that he lets down his guard when the camera isn't around and becomes a fun-loving cut up... he certainly doesn't have a slew of kids showing up to games to be able to see their daddy for the first time. anyhoo, I voted for Sheed... JK STOMP
Karl Malone. A better player than Duncan, IMO, and his longevity is impressive. Maybe Duncan will surpass him someday, but not yet. Ed O.
McHale, he was the prototype for the PF position. Big, strong, 9 time all nba 1st/2nd defensive team, blocked shots, had a career ts% over 60%. What's most remarkable about him is that he made the all-start team 7 times and he was the Celtics 6th man for most of his career.
Duncan -- Kiss the rings! Karl Malone was the superior physical specimen, but I wonder how good he would have been without playing next to Stockton.
Nope, Hakeem ALWAYS played center, even during the Twin Towers days early in his career. Sampson, though taller, played PF on those teams. Sampson was a much better ball handler, better outside shooter and better passer than Hakeem. Hakeen was a much better low post defender, a better low post scorer and a much better offensive rebounder. So, it made perfect sense to play Hakeem at center and Sampson at PF - which is exactly what the Rockets did. BNM
KG best big man ever? No way, not even close. When did you start watching NBA basketball, 1996? Wilt, Kareem, Russell, Malone (both Moses and Karl), Hakeem, David Robinson, Shaq, and a couple dozen more big men were all better than KG. BNM
