Youve got to give more than a one word post in comparisons, man..I say Tim Duncan. He was the better defender, rebounder, post player, leader, and he won 3 championships, whereas Malone and Stockton couldn't manage one.
In the Jazz's defense, do you think the Spurs would have been able to steal a championship away from the Bulls?I still go with Duncan though. Duncan is just so much more clutch than Malone is. At the end of the game I'd rather have Duncan on the floor than Malone, and that's enough for me.
Malone. he averaged more ppg as an old man than TD did in his prime. I wouldn't go as far as to saying Duncan was a better defender or rebounder. Malone was a very under rated defender, his favorite move was to strip the ball down low, while it doesn't do very much for statistics its a great way to screw up the other teams offense flow. it also lead to a lot of 24 second violations. their rebounds are similar, except Malone had more rebounding help than Duncan. Malone had guys like Mark Eaton, Mike Brown, Greg Ostertag, Felton Spencer ect who were are good to decent rebounders. Duncan had Malike Rose and David Robinson. Duncan does have a big advantage in blocks, but thats because Duncan is two inches taller and is built more like a shot blocker than Malone is, also Duncan likes challenging shots in the air, while Malone perfered striping the ball.the reason for the championship discrepancy is the talent in the league. when Malone was in his prime(88-98) the league was a lot deeper. if TD had to go against some of the same talent Malone did Im not sure he'd win a title either. In duncan prime(00-04) there were fewer power houses than in Malones time, and fewer legandary bigmen.
Malone, easily. He always averaged at least 20 at 8 during his career with the Jazz. He did not win the chip because of MJ. Malone's team was not very talented but they played as a team. If Malone still played today, I still think he could average 12 ppg easily. While Tim Duncan does have rings, his teams were more talented. If TD played MJ in the finals, do you really think he could lead the Spurs past the Bulls? Never. Malone was a great scorer until he retired but Tim Duncan's numbers have gone down...
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (wolverine30 @ Oct 14 2006, 02:53 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Malone, easily. He always averaged at least 20 at 8 during his career with the Jazz. He did not win the chip because of MJ. Malone's team was not very talented but they played as a team. If Malone still played today, I still think he could average 12 ppg easily. While Tim Duncan does have rings, his teams were more talented. If TD played MJ in the finals, do you really think he could lead the Spurs past the Bulls? Never. Malone was a great scorer until he retired but Tim Duncan's numbers have gone down...</div>Malone easily? what a joke. During Duncan's stay with the spurs, he has always averaged over 18 and 10 and that was just one season where he had a full season foot injury. Before that, he had never averaged below 20 and 10. The Jazz didnt get the job done when Jordan was playing baseball so they had their chance. And actually yes, I think the Spurs could have put up a very good fight against the Bulls. Im not going to sit here and say that they would have at least won one, but I wouldnt have been suprised what so ever.Also, how has Duncan had more help than Malone? Malone had one of the best PG's of all time and a VERY good player in Jeff Hornacek. What a dumb thing to say. Both team had their share of role players as well. And in the shortened season in 99, duncans second best player was a over the hill David Robinson. And guess what, the Spurs lost "2" games in that entire playoffs including when they swept a team with Kobe and Shaq. Not to shabby.Also, look at the accomplishments by Duncan. 2 MVP's, ROY, All First Team NBA every year expect 05-06, Numerous 1st and 2nd 1st Team all Defense, 3 championships, and he won the finals MVP in all 3. Not to mention David Robinson and him shared the humanitariasm award a few years back which shows his leadership off the court. Not to mention his leadership on the court. Malone was never the leader of his team, Stockton was and Malone wouldnt have had nearly as succesful of a career with Stockton.
mos definitley I would go with Malone!!!!! I just make it plain and simple, if Malone in his prime played Duncan in his prime who would win, team or one on one?? And honestly I think Malone would win most of the matchups
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Malone, easily. He always averaged at least 20 at 8 during his career with the Jazz. He did not win the chip because of MJ.</div>I am so sick of hearing that garbage. Yes, MJ stopped them plenty of times, But what about in 1994 and 1995 during Jordans retirement when they got there ass handed to them by Houston? Jordan wasn't on the Rockets so thats no excuse.
Malone is better. Everybody overrates Time Duncan as if he is the greates PF ever, he isn't close to that. Malone is however, he has better career numbers, and that says something. I don't care how many rings TD has because we are comparing the individuals not their teams. TD wouldn't win a title anywhere else.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Michael Bryant @ Oct 19 2006, 10:48 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Malone is better. Everybody overrates Time Duncan as if he is the greates PF ever, he isn't close to that. Malone is however, he has better career numbers, and that says something. I don't care how many rings TD has because we are comparing the individuals not their teams. TD wouldn't win a title anywhere else.</div>Ok...he has better career number...getting spoonfed by arguably the best PG of all time. Yet he still never won a title. Say what you want about their teams, but you can't look past TD's 3 rings, and 3 Finals MVP's.
You can't, but I don't like to throw in team success when comparing two players. And yeah, Malone had Stockton but, without him, Malone would have still been great; maybe not as effecient but great nonetheless.
If Malone would of stayed in Utah that last season rather than signing with the Lakers, he would most likely of passed Kareem for All-Time Points. He's 2nd on the list. Now are you seriously going to put Duncan higher than the 2nd all-time leading scorer in NBA history? I don't think so; at least not in my book you don't. Also, I remember reading that Balla doesn't think you can use the whole "playing against Michael" in Malone's defense, than that should also make playing with Stockton is just as irrelavent.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (redneck @ Oct 15 2006, 03:18 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>In duncan prime(00-04) there were fewer power houses than in Malones time, and fewer legandary bigmen.</div> The reason there a fewer ledgendary big men is because they are still playing. It takes a few years of retirement for players to fully be appreciated.Duncan Played againt Shaq, Ben Wallace,KG, Mutombo, Nowitski, Brand etc etc.I choose TD. More versatile and Its not like he was playing against the nbadl to win all those titles!!! -people always say that. Its BS. Word to BALLA - Malone had no excuse in 94-95
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (pjcolpitts? @ Oct 19 2006, 11:27 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>If Malone would of stayed in Utah that last season rather than signing with the Lakers, he would most likely of passed Kareem for All-Time Points. He's 2nd on the list. Now are you seriously going to put Duncan higher than the 2nd all-time leading scorer in NBA history? I don't think so; at least not in my book you don't. Also, I remember reading that Balla doesn't think you can use the whole "playing against Michael" in Malone's defense, than that should also make playing with Stockton is just as irrelavent.</div>3 rings, 3 finals MVP's, 2 regular season MVP's, being a clutch player, better defender, and better rebounder outweigh being a better scorer (and while Malone was a better scorer, Duncan is a better post up scorer). Playing with Stockton made Malone a better player, while MJ was another obstacle in Malone's way. Big difference.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (pjcolpitts? @ Oct 19 2006, 11:27 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>If Malone would of stayed in Utah that last season rather than signing with the Lakers, he would most likely of passed Kareem for All-Time Points. He's 2nd on the list. Now are you seriously going to put Duncan higher than the 2nd all-time leading scorer in NBA history? I don't think so; at least not in my book you don't. Also, I remember reading that Balla doesn't think you can use the whole "playing against Michael" in Malone's defense, than that should also make playing with Stockton is just as irrelavent.</div>Second all time leading scorer off the bench is more of a life time acheivement thing, than who was the better player in my opinion. For example, John Stockton holds the record for all time leading steals in history. If you look at steals per game however, Allen Iverson has 2.34 while Stockton averaged 2.2 steals per game. So I don't really look at all time points leader as a way of telling things.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (pjcolpitts? @ Oct 20 2006, 11:27 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>If Malone would of stayed in Utah that last season rather than signing with the Lakers, he would most likely of passed Kareem for All-Time Points. He's 2nd on the list. Now are you seriously going to put Duncan higher than the 2nd all-time leading scorer in NBA history</div>Duncan is still active- there is nothing to say he wont play for another 12 years and pass Malone.
TD was not more versitile than Malone.Malone is just a much more dominant scorer than Duncan. TD can't do much outside of the paint, Malone can.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Michael Bryant @ Oct 20 2006, 11:40 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>TD was not more versitile than Malone.Malone is just a much more dominant scorer than Duncan. TD can't do much outside of the paint, Malone can.</div>HUH what are you talking about??? TD hits banks shots from 15 - 18 feet.
