Date ended: Monday, September 25thTopic: Who is the greatest Power Forward of all time?Rules: Keep it clean, No need to throw put instults and harmful remarks. You guys can just go at it unti the due date, Debate like crazy. If you both agree with the topic, See if you can prove your opponents points wrong, If you agree to the extent where there is nothing to debate about, Then say something and we will get you a new topic. Remember: This contest is about your debate skills and how you can defeat your opponent while persuading them, and the judges, that your point is correct. It is NOT about what side you choose as it is how you prove your points.Good luck!
Karl MaloneI'm definitely going to say Karl Malone here. Sure, he never got a title, but I'm not taking anything away from him. He got there, and the ONLY thing that stopped him from winning was arguably the best player of all-time (MJ). But Karl Malone had it all: big, very athletic, huuuge (muscular), an absolute bull, iron-man (very durable), excellent rebounder, good passer for a big man, could score however many points he wanted on any given night, he was always one of the best defensive players in the league, decent free throw shooter, had a very soft touch yet he was absolutely powerful.You want to talk accomplishments?- 2 time MVP- Has been an All-Star more than 10 times- Named one of the 50 Greatest Players of All-Time like 5-6 years before he even retired- Has made numerous All-NBA Defensive teams- I believe he is 2nd in NBA history in total points- Olympic Gold MedalistI mean you could get into all the little statistical records as well, but you can't expect me to know those by heart. But Malone was the total package on both ends of the floor and he was a leader.Oh, and do NOT say that he looked better than he was because he had Stockton. I don't care if his PG was John Stockton or Orien Greene, he was physically unstoppable.
I am taking Tim DuncanHere's why:Tim is a top 15 player of all time in my books. He did it all. He won 3 championships with the Spurs, and was Finals MVP all three times. He has been a great player since he entered the league, (averaging a very impressive 21 and 12 in his first season!), and has been dominate every year since. He is maybe the best post player in history. You name a post move-he's got it. He is also a very smart player, and a great leader by example. Tim is also one of the greatest defensive players of all time, as he was named to the All D team a whole 9 times!And he also plays great in big game situations. In his sophomore season, Tim Duncan was Finals MVP with averages of 22, 11, and 2 bpg. In his 2nd championship, Tim posted an unreal 24 ppg, and 17 rpg, and 5! (5 bpg is an NBA Finals Record!) Talk about playing big in key situations. He was absolutely a monster in that Finals. In his 3rd 'ship he posted 21, 14, and 2, which is very good also.Also, let's talk about how great a leader Tim Duncan was. He won the NBA Finals in his 2nd season, and was Finals MVP. That is just unbelievable for a big man to develop that quickly. Also, in both '99 and '03 he had very little support. In '99 the next best player was a very old David Robinson, who only had modest numbers (for his standards) of 16 and 10. He and Sean Elliot were the only others to average over 10 ppg, and yet, Tim still won them the NBA championship. In '03 again he had very little support. He had young and inexperienced sidekick in Tony Parker, whereas Karl Malone had one of the best pg of all time. So you can see how good of a leader Tim is from that.Okay, now Id say it's time for stats and accomplishments.Career stats: 22, 12, and 2.4Playoff stats: 24, 13, 2.72 time MVP winner3 Time NBA Finals MVP winner8 time all star8 time All NBA first team1 time All NBA second team9 time All Defensive teamNBA ROY You could use that excuse if Karl and the Jazz made the Finals every year, but they didn't. They only made it twice to the Finals and lost both times. And Karl Malone had freaking John Stockton when Tim had an old D-Rob, and a young Tony Parker in '99 and '03. If Tim was on the Jazz during that time then they would have done better than what they did with Karl on it. Face it man. Tim is just the better leader of the two. Tim was better. Karl averaged 10 career rpg, and Tim is averaging 12. So you can't really use that. Tim is also a great passer for a big man. Tim was a better defensive player than Karl. Tim is probably one of the best defensive players in this era, maybe next to Ben Wallace. He made the All Defensive team 9 times in 9 years. Whereas Karl made it 4 times in 19 seasons. -Tim was also a 2 time MVP winner-Tim has been an all star 8 times in 9 seasons. When he is done playing, he will have made more ASG appearences than Karl, no doubt.-As I said before, Tim is superior in defense and All Defensive Teams-What does being on the dream team have to do with anything? Tim won a medal too in 2000 anyways... You're using Karl's leadership for your debate? Come on. Karl had freaking John Stockton and he only made it twice, and couldnt win the big one, whereas Tim made it 4 times, and won it 3 times. He had a crappy team in both '99 and '03 but yet still won it. He also played great in all his Finals appearences. Tall about leadership.Okay, so my case is that Tim was the better post player, rebounder, rebounder, shotblocker, leader, more championships than Karl. Karl is only a better scorer than Tim, but he had one of the best passers and pg's of all time in John Stockton. Tim has never had a star sidekick like Karl did, but yet he has still had alot more success.
Shaquille O'Neal anyone? I could use that excuse if they made it every year. OK but my "excuse" was Jordan. You pointed out they went to the Finals twice. Now I ask you... WHO DID THEY PLAY BOTH TIMES? Thank you very much... WTF? I said Malone was an excellent rebounder. And as you pointed out, he averaged 10 rpg. Just because Duncan averaged 2 more rpg doesn't mean Malone wasn't an excellent rebounder! That's like me saying you can't count Duncan's points because Malone scored more than him. That just doesn't fly. That's great, but Malone was still a very good defender. I don't necessarily care about how many All-Defensive teams he was on. The bottom line is that he was a good defender, and in his prime he was a top defender in the league. OK, so just because Duncan won a medal as well means it's right for you to just take away Malone's??? It's still a big accomplishment. - A team consisting of Tim Duncan, David Robinson, Sean Elliot, and Avery Johnson is NOT a crappy team.- Are you telling me Malone didn't play well in the Finals too? What are you smoking? Wow. Have you ever heard of David Robinson? You are an IDIOT and a half if you think Robinson wasn't a star sidekick. He's arguably a top 5 center of all-time, and in 1999 he was in his 8th or 9th year in the league - not that old. All of this is true, but you know what, I don't care about this post you made because all you did was google his career numbers. That's not what this debating is all about, it's all about your real knowlege. I'm not saying you have no knowlege, but I'm just saying this post is irrelevant in my book. I could go to nba.com and look at Karl Malone's page and list every single accomplishment, but that's not real knowlege. That's basically copying and pasting.I don't even count this as a debate if all CB4 is going to do is go and search all the exact career accomplishments. That's not even knowlege.
Yeah, that's why I said maybe. Tim is one of the best post players of all time. Yeah, I know they played Jordan. But they werent able to make it to the Finals more than 2 times with a superstar duo of Malone and Stockton. You could use the Jordan excuse if they made it almost every time (kind of like the Lakers in the 60's), but lost to the same team over and over again. Thats not the case. They only made it twice, so I can definately use Tim's 3 titles and 4 Finals appearances to his advantage. My purpose of doing that was to show you that Tim was an even better rebounder. I'm trying to minimize some of your points in this debate. I realize that Malone was a great defender. Im just trying to point out that Tim was an EVEN BETTER defensive player. Being a gold medal winner for the Dream Team isnt a big accomplishment. Back then they just dominated all other teams. It's not a huge accomplishment, and not an individual one at all. Dude, besides Tim, David Robinson was the only other very good player. Sean Elliot averaged a whole 11 ppg. Whoopee! And don't even tell me that Avery Johnson was a great player. Look at the difference of pg's here. Tim had AVery Johnson who averaged 10 and 7 in only 50 games, well Karl had freaking John Stockton. Now, you can't tell me that having John Stockton didn't help Karl at all. That is a lie. David Robinson was at the end of his career. He was only really great for Tim for Tim's first 3 seasons anyway. When Tim won the championship, David averaged 16 and 10. I wouldn't really call that star numbers to tell you the truth. And he wasnt a top 5 center of all time when Tim had him, so why are you even telling me that?Karl had John his whole freaking career. Tim had an aging D-Rob in his first three seasons. So what? And it was Tim who won the Spurs the title, not David btw. Wow, you're telling me that I cant get stats and references when I am making my initial debate for Tim? Stats help me prove how great he was. I AM DEBATING YOU, dude. What the hell do you want? Stop complaining.
Malone is up there as well though, and Malone could always score more than Duncan. Yeah but I said Malone was an excellent rebounder. You told me "I couldn't use that." That's bull. It's not all about individual accomplishments. Winning a gold medal is a big accomplishment, I don't care what you say. Here's the way I see it: If you have a team with two big men on the 50 Greatest Players of All-Time list, and both still producing a lot, you never have a crappy team. And I never said Avery Johnson was a great player, but he was very solid. And Sean Elliot was a good player, screw the "only 11 ppg" (how are you supposed to put up 15-17 ppg with Tim Duncan and David Robinson on your team?). He was like Bruce Bowen (different type of player, but Elliot was the X-Factor on that team, much like Bowen is now).And you want to talk about the Jazz' role players? Jeff Hornacek was a great shooter, so he was a good player. But who else did they have? Byron Russell - not bad. Greg Ostertag? Howard Eisley? Shandon Anderson? Jacque Vaughn? Come on man, Malone/Stockton didn't have a great supporting cast either. Using stats is not a bad thing, but most of your posts/points are based on per game averages and all that crap. You don't KNOW all that stuff. I see a debate as an argument between two people using nothing but their own real knowlege. You keep stuffing me with stats that you are looking up (yes, you are looking a lot of them up). Use more of your brian, not so much of nba.com, then I'll stop "complaining."
Just because Malone scored 3 more ppg doesn't mean he was the better post player. Mr. Fundamental was superior in the post in my opinion. Not to mention Malone had John Stockton to aid his ppg numbers. You can't use that in your debate for why Malone is better, because Tim is an even better rebounder. Sure, you could say that Malone is a great rebounder. But that doesn't really account for anything since Tim is even better. Do you know what I mean? Okay, you can list it if you want. doesn't bother me. Im not going to argue about this anymore. I'll just mention that Duncan also won one. Okay, first of all, D-Rob was not playing like a 50 greatest player of all time, and Duncan was in his 2nd freaking season when they won the championship. Okay, he had David for his first three seasons. What other sidekick has he ever had? Tony Parker this year is the greatest one since. Malone had freaking John Stockton around him pretty much his whole career. I'm just saying that that team doesn't really look like an NBA championship team to me.Well, Malone had Adrian Dantley at the start of his career, who was averaging an amazing 30 ppg! You also forgot Thurl Bailey. He was averaging 20 ppg in his prime for Malone and Stockton. He played for the Jazz from '84 to '92, and when Malone was there, he never averaged less than 12 ppg until after the '92 season. You can't say that he wasnt a big help at all. You also forgot Darrell Griffith who was good at the end of his career, and the beginning of Malone's. How about Mark Eaton? The 7"3 behemoth who averaged 3.5 career bpg for the Jazz. How about Jeff Malone? He never averaged less than 16 ppg, and averaged 20 ppg one year, in his 4 year stint with the Jazz in the early 90's. Blue Edwards? Tyrone Corbin? Tom Chambers? David Benoit? Chris Morris? Donyell Marshall? Andrei Kirilenko? Matt Harpring? So as you can see Malone did have alot of good role players down the road. And I suggest you do some research next time, because you forgot ALOT of good role players Malone had, and only managed to list the ones in the late 90's. So you were wrong about this... I use stats to back up my points. I don't see anything wrong with that. They help me prove points. You should try it some time. I am having an argumentt with you. Im typing these words through my brain, not through nba.com. Jesus christ, look around dude. Alot of people use stats. Stop bitching and complaining.
I remember numerous years where Malone averaged 28 ppg plus. A couple years he put up 30. Duncan has always been around 22-23.But either way, using John Stockton as an excuse really bugs me. Richard Jefferson is a star caliber player in this league, are you going to pick him apart because he has Jason Kidd? No. Yes, I completely understand where you are coming from. But what I said was that Malone was an excellent rebounder, I never compared his rebounding to Duncan's at first. In fact, that was the opening post wasn't it?"Just because Malone scored 3 more ppg doesn't mean he was the better post player." Well, just because Tim Duncan averaged 2 more rpg doesn't mean Malone will wasn't an excellent rebounder. If the Spurs of the past few years don't look like a championship team to you, then you need to watch more basketball. Why don't they look like a championship team to you? Because they don't have a Shaq/Kobe-like superstar matchup? That doesn't always define a championship caliber team.Tony Parker - Top 10 PG in the NBAGinobili - could put up 20/5/5 if he really wantedBowen - arguably still the best perimiter defender in the NBAMichael Finley - excellent 6th man optionRobert Horry - awesome role player, very clutchVan Exel - veteran PGI mean how is that not a championship team in your eyes? They have offensive power, veteran leadership, an awesome coach, and most importantly - DEFENSE. I don't understand how the hell that doesn't look like a championship team to you. There you go again with making "points" based on statistics alone. Tell me this, if you never went and looked it up, would you know that Bailey played for Utah from 84-92? No. Would you know these guys' scoring averages? No. How about Eaton's bpg? How about the roster of the early 90's? No. THIS IS NOT YOUR KNOWLEGE! IT'S NBA.COM'S! STOP LOOKING STUFF UP AND DEBATE USING YOUR KNOWLEGE!!!!And either way:Tom Chambers nearing the end of his career, right?Donyell Marshall - a very young and unestablished Marshall The problem is that it's not YOUR knowlege! You don't know all the rosters of the 90's, everyone's stats, etc. You look your facts up. That's not a true debate if all you are going to do is look up stats and rosters. Use the knowlege you have in your brain. That's what I use, and that's the way it should be. Looking up stats and stuff should not be the way to "win" a debate. It's not YOUR actual knowlege.
Well, Duncan did average 25 one year. But I do see what you mean. It doesn't hurt when you have John Stockton as your pg though. Come on..you have to admit that Tim would get those type of numbers too if he had John Stockton throughout his whole career. And scoring was pretty much the only thing that Malone was superior to Tim at. I wouldnt really say that I am using Stockton as an excuse. I'm just saying that Stockton definately helped Malone's numbers. And you just can't deny that. John Stockton was a type of player that could make great players even greater. Okay..yes..I will agree with that statement. Malone is a good rebounder. But it really doesn't mean anything, because I can easily say that Tim was the better rebounder. Go ahead and use that statement in your debate if you feel like it.. That was a pretty poor effort to try to make me sound like I am contradicting myself. First of all, in the first statement we are talking about the better post player, and in the second one we are talking about being excellent at something. (By the way, I never said that Malone wasnt excellent at rebounding). Those are two different things. Second of all, ppg have nothing to do with being a better post player anyway. (Is Kobe a better post player than Tim? How about Dirk?). And in the 2nd statement rpg has everything to do with rebounding. Whatever man... WTF are you talking about now? I wasnt even talking about the current Spurs team, I was talking about the one in '99. And it's true, without Duncan that team isnt that great. Youve got D-Rob, yeah, but it's not D-Rob in his prime. He is averaging 16 and 10, which is not D-Rob like stats. Then you have role players like Sean Elliott and Avery Johnson. That team doesn't neccisarily jump out at you at all if you subtract Duncan.Next time, read my posts over again before you reply with some BS that has nothing to do with what's being said. Well, I guess you just have to complain about me using stats instead of trying to debate my point. Well, too bad. Look around. Everyone else uses stats for their debate. Get over it, man. I'm looking stuff up to back up my debate. Jesus christ, man. Everyone else uses stats. Stop complaining, seriously.Back the point - You wanted to talk about the Jazz role players, so I listed them. Chambers averaged 11 ppg and 4 rpg in one of his seasons with the Jazz. I dont know why you wouldnt call him a role player for that season, if you are going to shove Sean Elliot's 11 ppg into my face all the time. A very young and unexperienced Marshall? How was he young and unexperienced. He was 28 and 29 and in his 7th and 8th seasons in his stint with the Jazz. I suggest you look things up as well, or else you come across sounding like an idiot. And you tell me I can't use Donyell? He averaged 14 and 15 ppg and 7 and 8 rpg in those two seasons. Those arent decent numbers? He was obviousy a great help to the team. Blah Blah Blah.. Again, EVERYONE ELSE USES STATS. Even look in the Nba dogmatist - ballerman debate. They're using stats. I look things up to support my knowledge. Why dont you try countering my points for a change instead of just complaining all the time?
Yeah one year. And thanks for admitting I was right. Karl Malone could have score 30 on any given night, John Stockton by his side or Dan Dickau. He was just that good. Stockton was a great playmaker, but he is not the reason Karl Malone was as good as he was. Karl Malone could have put up the same numbers with a different PG. You can't just cancel out Karl Malone's talent just because Duncan is a little bit better. That's not right. That's like debating Shawn Marion and Paul Pierce and saying you can't use Pierce's rebounding, even though he is one of the best at his position. My statement was poor? Not as poor as you using Kobe vs. Duncan/Dirk as an example. I understand what you mean, but you are wrong.You never said Malone wasn't an excellent rebounder, right. But you DID say that I couldn't use his rebounding talents because Duncan was a little better. That's retarded. You can't just entirely take away Karl Malone's rebounding skills just because Duncan was a smidge better. Why don't you specify next time then? You did mention Tony Parker in there, didn't you?And Sean Elliot/Avery Johnson may not jump out at you, but are you telling me Bryon Russell and Shandon Anderson do too? Greg Ostertag? It's not the fact that you are using stats, god dammit. It's the fact that you are NOT USING YOUR OWN KNOWLEGE. <u>LOOKING UP F*CKING STATS ON NBA.COM AND GOOGLE IS BULLSH*T. USE YOUR BRAIN. I THINK IT'S TERRIBLE THAT ALL YOU HAVE IS LOOKED UP STATS TO BACK ANYTHING UP. IT'S NOT YOUR KNOWLEGE</u>.It's sad that you have to sink as low as looking up rosters/stats every post to make a point. Hey, tell me this: if you never used NBA.com or Google, would have have ever known how many points/rebounds Tom Chambers averaged? Sean Elliot? Donyell Marshall's age, stats, and experience in the league? NO YOU WOULDN'T HAVE. Therefore, this is another post of you using NOTHING but looked up stats. You don't know any of this, it's not your own knowlege. Use you brain and stop using nba.com and I will stop bitching. I will never change and use nothing but stats. Why? Because that's cheap and stupid. When I type responses to these debates, never once have I went and looked up stats and rosters. I use my head. You use nothing but nba.com.Sean Elliot was also more important to the team than his "only 11 ppg." Look at Bruce Bowen's career averages - do you think he is a very important player? Not from looking at that stat sheet.
[/quote] Karl was a great scorer, but his numbers would be lower if he didnt have as great a pg that he had by his side. It's the truth, whether you'd like to admit it or not. Dude, I already said that Malone was a good rebounder. It's just that Duncan was better. And that has nothing to do with what we're talking about. Pierce and Marion play totally different positions, and their physique is totallu different as well. What? I said that to prove that scoring more points doesn't make you the better post player. Alright, but you can't use that as an argument to why Malone was better because, Duncan was even better at rebounding. Okay, those aren't even the guys I mentioned. Karl Malone, John Stockton, Jeff Hornacek, and Bryon Russell does certainly stand out to me though, to tell you the truth. There you go again...Everyone uses stats man. Im sorry you dont like it, but thats just part of debating. Get over it. Im going to look up stats to backup my points. I suggest you start debating instead of spassing out, until it's too late. No, I wouldnt. Again, they help me find things out in order to prove you wrong. Stats are facts. They can certainly help you out in debating about sports. Okay, I used stats, yes. But you're the one that know looks like an idiot for those things you said about Donyell Marshall. I think someone's getting pretty angry.. Okay, thats not true. Im glad youre trying to cheap shot me though, to get more love from the judges. I think they'll read through the debate carefully enough to notice that my entire debate wasnt just based off NBA.com I just said that because you basically said that Tom Chambers was un-important when in fact they averaged the same total of ppg. Maybe Chambers was more important than his ppg totals as well. He brough leadership to the team as well.Okay, since this may be my last reply, I'll state my end conclusion.Tim was better than Malone because he brought better leadership, won 3 titles, 3 Finals MVP's, better rebounder, post player, defender, shot blocker, etc..The only thing Malone was better at really was scoring, but he had the 2nd greatest pg of all time along side of him to help out his ppg totals.
Alright guys, 14 more min....you can use this time to create last minute wrapups or CB can add one last reply....but after 9pmET it is OVER. ALL posts after 9pm will be disregarded.
First of all, I have to admit this is an extremely awesome debate; both you guys put up great points. This is a very tough to find a clear winner... but I've made my decision. CelticBalla32 This was an extremely close decision and I read it over twice to look at the whole picture and filter out any bias. I may agree with TimmyD being the best, but CB32 brought out a solid case. I can see now that agreeing with the opponent can hurt you and that mightve been the deciding thing if anything.
OK, I missed the cut-off, I wasn't near my computer. And I know this won't count, but I'm saying it anyway because it irritates the hell out of me:CB4 has admittingly looked up stats every time he posts a reply. How is that fiar/valid? IMO, a debate is about two people arguing a topic about their own knowlege, not looking stuff up.Example: A political debate is going on. Do you see anyone saying "give me 5 minutes to look this up on my laptop"... 5 minutes later... "AHA! You are wrong. According to www...." HELL NO. That's not the way it's supposed to go.So, I could care less what the judges say about this debate. In my mind I am the winner because I used nothing but my brain while CB4 looked up everything he said.
CelticBalla- This is a debate, in a debate facts support nearly everything. It validates your arguement. If the facts are close, you can then use your knowledge and make up different reasons why the other player has better stats yet your player is the better player. But to criticize someone who uses facts is ridiculous, as without some facts and bulk your knowledge is not validated and sort of just floating around without any sort of confirmation. I mean your arguement about Bruce Bowen not showing up on the stat sheet would be true, but there are more stats than just per game averages....defensive awards, giving examples of him stopping another player, etc... You can give examples, stats, whatever....as long as it supports your opinion.I will give my winner later, along with copy and paste the other judges choices (Eliite, from now on PLEASE PM me with your vote before posting).
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ELiiiTE @ Sep 25 2006, 10:28 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>First of all, I have to admit this is an extremely awesome debate; both you guys put up great points. This is a very tough to find a clear winner... but I've made my decision. CelticBalla32 This was an extremely close decision and I read it over twice to look at the whole picture and filter out any bias. I may agree with TimmyD being the best, but CB32 brought out a solid case. I can see now that agreeing with the opponent can hurt you and that mightve been the deciding thing if anything.</div>WTF? Sorry, this answer just makes no sense to me.When did I agree with him? I just dont understand why you thought he had the better debate.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Nitro1118 @ Sep 25 2006, 09:47 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>CelticBalla- This is a debate, in a debate facts support nearly everything. It validates your arguement. If the facts are close, you can then use your knowledge and make up different reasons why the other player has better stats yet your player is the better player. But to criticize someone who uses facts is ridiculous, as without some facts and bulk your knowledge is not validated and sort of just floating around without any sort of confirmation. I mean your arguement about Bruce Bowen not showing up on the stat sheet would be true, but there are more stats than just per game averages....defensive awards, giving examples of him stopping another player, etc... You can give examples, stats, whatever....as long as it supports your opinion.I will give my winner later, along with copy and paste the other judges choices (Eliite, from now on PLEASE PM me with your vote before posting).</div>Using facts is great. That's obvious. But it's the fact that he's <u>looking them up</u> instead of using sheer knowlege. I hate that. It's like I'm battling nba.com.I'm done arguing about that now, but I had to get my point across. Using websites to get your information is not the way it should be. It should be based on you and your knowlege. Nothing more, nothing less.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Nitro1118 @ Sep 25 2006, 08:47 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I will give my winner later, along with copy and paste the other judges choices (Eliite, from now on PLEASE PM me with your vote before posting).</div>Oh sorry about that, maybe I didnt fully read your PM to me... I already posted in the other one but foir the finals I will keep that in mind CB4 I'm sorry if I didnt satisfy you with my decision making... but that's not my mission in life.It's clear to [>>ME<<] that celtic won it, I agree I didnt really put my reasons all that great but... well live with it
