Who are you going to root for?

Malone was never close to the post defender that Duncan was. Not even close.

 

And Malone was the superior player on offense.

 

Duncan is a 4 time NBA Champion.

Duncan career PER - 24.7
Malone career PER - 23.9

 

Duncan is more efficient has more moves and dishes out way more assists. His stats also go up in the playoffs were Malones would go down.

 

Duncan never went against the Jordan era Bulls.

Malone is a 25 and 10 career average. That's a CAREER average of 25 an 10.

Duncan is a 20 and 11 career average. During the late 80s the guy was practically unstoppable. in 89-90 he averaged 31 points and 11 rebounds per game. Duncan has never averaged more than 25 ppg.

 

More assists eh?

Duncan 3.1 career apg

Malone 3.6 career apg

Also, Malone averaged better than 4 assists per game seven times in his career, with one season at 4.7 apg. For a power forward that's insane. Duncan has never averaged more than 3.9 assists per game. Malone did it seven times, Duncan has never done it in 14 years in the league.

 

Malone Playoff PER - 21.1
Duncan Playoff PER - 25.4

 

In 1989-90, the NBA averaged 10 more points per game than it does now. It all kind of evens out. You gotta look at normalized stats like PER or TS% to figure out how a Malone would perform in today's NBA (hint: he'd lead the NBA in Flagrant 2's)

 

Good thing PER is the only thing that matters, eh?

 

I can play that game too.

Malone averaged 0.8 blocks per game for his career. He only averaged 1.5 per game one year, all other years were 1.0 per game or lower.

Duncan averaged 2.2 blocks per game for his career. He has never averaged less than 1.5 per game for a year, and has averaged 2.9 per game for a year.

 

Maybe that PER is partly why Duncan has rings and Malone doesn't.

 

The NBA averaged more points because David Stern hadn't turned the league into a joke yet. You can't even touch guys like Blake Griffin, Kevin Durant, or Dirk Nowitzki today. Preferential treatment for superstars is off the charts. The league 1989 was back in the Bad Boy days, when players like Michael Jordan were getting hammered by the Pistons and the Knicks. I am not a fan of Karl Malone. I hated the guy, but he was an amazing power forward. He was 6'9. Tim Duncan is a center masquerading as a power forward.

The question isn't how Karl Malone would do today, but more importantly how Tim Duncan would have done in 1989?

 

6'9 vs 6'11

Who should be averaging more blocks?

 

Duncan was no slouch on offense. Duncan was good/great at offense and maybe the best post defender in modern NBA history.

 

I didn't say he was a slouch on offense. I said Malone was the superior offensive player, and he was.

 

So what. We are talking about who is the best PF of all time, I'd like my PF to get another block per game than another assist per game.

And besides, Ben Wallace was 6'9 and he seemed to get blocks just fine

 

But, you said Malone was the better overall player because he was better on offense. Duncan was slightly behind Malone on offense, but lightyears better defensively.

I'm sure Duncan could have sacrificed a championship or two for 5 more ppg. But, he never had to score more to win.

 

You're not even playing in the same game. Did you see what he was responding to? I said that Malone was the superior offensive player and then Rhal said that Duncan "dishes out way more assists". How does your stats about blocks prove me wrong about Malone being the superior offensive player?

 

I never said he was the better overall player AND I never said Malone was the best PF of all time. It's amazing how people just make shit up in an argument. I said Malone was the superior offensive player and I said I would rather have Malone. I have given stats to prove my claim that he was the better offensive player and the other was just a personal preference. You can't argue a personal preference because it's personal.

Kind of funny though how you guys are using defensive stats and PER to argue with my claim that he was the better offensive player

 

lol, now were playing the semantics game. In my mind, and I'm pretty sure most people's minds if you say you'd rather have a player that plays the same position in essentially the same era, over the other player that means you think that player is better.... Call me crazy I know.

As for the advanced statistics aspect, I haven't even looked them up. I just know that Duncan's are better than Malone's. He was more a more efficient player that didn't need a high volume of shots to lead his team to the ultimate goal.

On personal preference, sure you can have that personal preference, but you're posting that personal preference in a medium that debates sports. People are going to tell you that personal preference is absurd if it is.