Bill Simmons now ranks Dirk the 2nd greatest PF ever.

[ElGee]

Karl Malone is an offensive juggernaut....

...

Why can't it be that Malone merely never had a ring because he and his team lost to people who were better than him?

So Malone's performance has nothing to do with anything, right?



Take 1997. MVP of the league. We all know about the Finals. 44.3 percent from the floor, 60.3 percent from the free throw line, averaging 23.8 points per game on 48.5 percent true shooting—far from his regular-season MVP numbers of 27.4 points per game on 55.0 percent shooting from the floor, 75.5 percent from the line and 60.0 percent true shooting. In Utah’s four losses in the ’97 Finals, Malone averaged 20.8 points on 40.5 percent shooting, 54.8 percent from the line and 44.9 percent true shooting. In their two wins, he averaged 30 points on 50 percent shooting, 75 percent from the line and 54.5 percent true shooting. Malone plays well, Jazz win, Malone doesn't play well, Jazz don't win.

But let's look further. Western Conference Finals against the Houston Rockets. MVP Malone averages 23.5 points on 44.8 percent shooting, 70 percent shooting from the line and 49.4 percent true shooting. In the deciding Game 6, Malone (the "offensive juggernaut") puts up 24 points on 24 shots and 46.6%TS. Fortunately for him (and the team), John Stockton puts up a team-high 25 points on 8-for-13 shooting (70.9% TS) and a game-high 13 assists and hits the game-winning three-pointer to put the Jazz into the Finals. The culmination on a series in which he averaged 20.5 points on 53.8 percent shooting, 66.6 percent true shooting and 10.3 assists, picking up the slack for MVP Malone.

Western Conference Semifinals against the Los Angeles Lakers. Malone averages 28.6 points on 38.3 percent shooting, 82.1 percent shooting from the line and 49.5 percent true shooting. His free throw shooting was the only thing that kept his TS% constant with what it was in the WCF.

First round against the LA Clippers, Malone averages 30.7 points on 48.5 percent shooting, 74.3 percent from the line and 55.2 percent true shooting. Showing that the MVP had no problem producing efficient offense when facing the Clippers in the postseason, but faltered against a higher caliber opponent. Which is a big deal for a guy who's supposed to be an "offensive juggernaut."

People make excuses for Malone because he faced the Bulls, when his FG% was virtually identical against the Rockets as it was against the Bulls (and even worse against the Lakers), his PPG were virtually identical against the Bulls as against the Rockets, and his true shooting percentages were about the same throughout the playoffs excluding the first round. The one percent difference in the Finals was solely due to free throw shooting—had Malone shot 70% from the line as he did against Houston and LAC, his TS% would have been 50.5%; but the pressure of the Finals got to him.

All that has nothing to do with teammates, but speaking of teammates, if not for Stockton, Malone never would have gotten to the Finals in the first place that year. The fact Stockton played well has nothing to do with how Malone performed, nor does it excuse it. If Malone played like an MVP, maybe he could have gotten a ring. People can't make excuses when a player's individual performance isn't up to par. I don't think it's too much to ask to expect an MVP to play like an MVP when it matters most.

I think you are forgetting that Malone had a large gash on his shooting hand (injured in the WCF) and that Houston had massive issues at PG, toting out Matt Maloney against Stockton.

[ThaRegul8r]

^
So what's the excuse for Malone's 38.3% shooting and 49.5% TS (virtually identical to the WCF) in the WCSF BEFORE that? I'm sure there's one forthcoming since Malone's always had apologists for his individual shortcomings (which have nothing to do with his teammates). He sustained an injury then too, right?

[ElGee]

WTF? What's with the attitude?

Try looking at game 3 vs. Los Angeles for your answer.

[ahonui06]

Malone just isn't a great playoff performer compared to Duncan, DIRK & Barkley. It's just the way it is. His stats drop in the postseason compared to the others.

[Regulio]

So we should base our opinion on Malone on one post-season ?
Even MJ had bad series.
Anyway, I'd go with 1.Duncan 2.Malone 3-5. Dirk/Barkley/KG (interchangeable)

[ahonui06]

So we should base our opinion on Malone on one post-season ?
Even MJ had bad series.
Anyway, I'd go with 1.Duncan 2.Malone 3-5. Dirk/Barkley/KG (interchangeable)

Malone's postseason numbers decreased compared to his regular season numbers. The other PFs don't.

[Regulio]

Malone's postseason numbers decreased compared to his regular season numbers. The other PFs don't.

Don't really see the huge drop I'm supposed to see.
RS career stats: 25.0/10.1/3.6/1.4 on .516 FG%, .742 FT%
PS career stats: 24.7/10.7/3.2/1.3 on .463 FG% .736 FT%

Yeah 5% FG drop is big, but KG dropped by 3%, Duncan dropped by 3%, Barkley too.
Only Dirk increased his efficiency in POs, but it is super-rare on such production as his.
So dunno why we should single out Malone as some kind of PO flop.

[NO-KG-AI]

BEcause KG and Duncan's value isn't nearly as hinged to being big scorers as Malone's is.

[ahonui06]

Malone's postseason numbers decreased compared to his regular season numbers. The other PFs don't.

Don't really see the huge drop I'm supposed to see.
RS career stats: 25.0/10.1/3.6/1.4 on .516 FG%, .742 FT%
PS career stats: 24.7/10.7/3.2/1.3 on .463 FG% .736 FT%

Yeah 5% FG drop is big, but KG dropped by 3%, Duncan dropped by 3%, Barkley too.
Only Dirk increased his efficiency in POs, but it is super-rare on such production as his.
So dunno why we should single out Malone as some kind of PO flop.

You hit it right on the head. His FG% dropped by 5%. That is a ton. I have DIRK as the 2nd best PF so obviously I already knew DIRK's playoff numbers improved his efficiency. The other PFs like KG & Duncan were better defenders than Malone/Barkley/DIRK so that is why their field goal efficiency dropping isn't as big of a deal.

[Regulio]

BEcause KG and Duncan's value isn't nearly as hinged to being big scorers as Malone's is.

Sure, I agree. But neither Barkley, nor Dirk are very good defenders. Malone is better than them on D.
So you have KG & TD, who declined a lot after 11-12 seasons. Karl was going strong at age 39, putting up 20/8/5 in his 18th season. Sure Malone didn't have the same impact as peak KG or peak TD on both ends of the floor, but 6-7 more all-star caliber seasons than KG & TD cannot be ignored imo.
Yeah I guess Barkley should be a clear number 5 in this discussion. Declined too rapidly for my taste.

[HeartBreakKid]

I can forgive dips in scoring for Malone and Barkley because they could rebound, run fast breaks and pass. Granted Dirk did step it up as well. But in general, I find Malone and Barkley to have more utility than Dirk.

Not to mention K Malone still played very good defense, sure he is not Tim Duncan (sorry, not everyone can be 7 feet tall ), but he had great man to man defense, and helped forced turn overs. He is not an anchor, but if he has a decent center with him, he'll make it work.

[questionmark]

I can forgive dips in scoring for Malone and Barkley because they could rebound, run fast breaks and pass. Granted Dirk did step it up as well. But in general, I find Malone and Barkley to have more utility than Dirk.

Not to mention K Malone still played very good defense, sure he is not Tim Duncan (sorry, not everyone can be 7 feet tall ), but he had great man to man defense, and helped forced turn overs. He is not an anchor, but if he has a decent center with him, he'll make it work.

Wait, so Dirk, who with the exception of last year played for his whole career with at best average centers and still had the Mavs as one of the Top-10 defenses 5 of the last 7 years is not making it work? This year, the Mavs are 4th in OppFG% and that without TC. And to think of Dirk as someone who can't run fastbreaks is rediculous. He can even lead the break, but just rarely does, because he is better as a trailor that steps into the three.

There is really one thing that annoys me, and its people not even trying to make an educated point in evaluating players. Its fine to say Malone could do this and Barkley could do, but its another thing to combine that with false statements about Dirk.

[Dr Positivity]

The argument for Dirk over Malone or Barkley is valid

However KG's definitely got him for 2nd best PF IMO. You can't tell me the gap between KG and Dirk's offense (while substantial) is enough to make up for KG's D, rebounding and passing. Nuh uh. Duncan, Hakeem and KG are in one group IMO, KG is just on the back end.

[dyukcs]

The argument for Dirk over Malone or Barkley is valid

However KG's definitely got him for 2nd best PF IMO. You can't tell me the gap between KG and Dirk's offense (while substantial) is enough to make up for KG's D, rebounding and passing. Nuh uh. Duncan, Hakeem and KG are in one group IMO, KG is just on the back end.

But that's the funny thing about this thread. You say KG is a tier above but the rest are on the same level, other people say it's Malone, and some say Barkley.

[Dr Positivity]

Dirk is def. gonna get the Hakeem tag for this generation though

- Won NBA title with 94 Rockets like star less cast + hard competition. Other Finals with similarly underwhelming help
- 67 Ws in 07. Yes they lost in the 1st round but that's made up for now

The 07 year I think is going to grow in infamy over the generations. 67 Ws is just insane, I'm still not sure how that and their like 50-5 run happened. On paper Dirk's 06 and 07 and 11 teams don't look much different than KG's early 2000s ones. I mean they was a huge difference, just not on paper. So KG I think is going to get a bad rap in comparison for not contending when Dirk and 03 Duncan could do it without a star - and a few years later, Dwight Howard could in a very similar situation.

KG over Dirk-a-philes will probably end up the minority. It's impossible to understate what Dirk winning with non spectacular name talent will do for his reputation long term. Dirk carrying B players to the Finals twice and 1 title vs KG getting those 50 W knockout years is a signficant difference for the easily fooled mass public and future RealGM generations

[Dr Positivity]

The argument for Dirk over Malone or Barkley is valid

However KG's definitely got him for 2nd best PF IMO. You can't tell me the gap between KG and Dirk's offense (while substantial) is enough to make up for KG's D, rebounding and passing. Nuh uh. Duncan, Hakeem and KG are in one group IMO, KG is just on the back end.

But that's the funny thing about this thread. You say KG is a tier above but the rest are on the same level, other people say it's Malone, and some say Barkley.

Is there really anyone who thinks Karl or Barkley are on the same level as Duncan and Hakeem?

The logic usually goes that having Duncan/Hakeem's all time great help defense while still getting one of the 5-10 or so best offensive players in the league, puts them clearly above a Malone/Barkley/Dirk who while all time greats offensively, aren't better offensively than Duncan/Hakeem by enough of a gap to match up to that defensive anchor value

It's hard for me to buy that KG shouldn't get edge over them for the same reason. The only argument to make in the fact of this one is that KG is not as elite a defensive player as Hakeem and Duncan. If you think KG is on that Tier 1 level defensively then there's no reason to separate Duncan/Hakeem from Malone/Barkley/Dirk and not to do so with KG, since we know he's slightly worse than Duncan and Hakeem offensively at most

[Dr Positivity]

If people are hung on the playoffs, don't forget that

- KG has been the best player on a title team
- Dirk has choked hard in the past
- Dirk is expected to be better offensively, while KG doesn't have to be on his level if the defense/rebounding makes up the gap. If KG is going off offensively as much as Dirk he's having the clearly higher impact.

So while I think Dirk is the more trustworthy playoff performer, it's not like a comparison of David Robinson vs Michael Jordan in terms of their playoff nutsacks. It's been pretty close throughout their careers. As elite as 2011 Dirk was don't underestimate 08 KG in that he was the key physically and mentally to their all time great defense which is why they won the title, while being a big threat offensively, going off for 24pts+ 9 out of 24 games including a great close out performance while setting screens and spacing the floor and passing and etc. That might have been less of a "he had his moment" run than Dirk's 2011 but it wasn't that much less.

[Regulio]

I surely don't forget that KG was failing to get anywhere all the time until he got 2 HoF teammates.
That's the biggest thing I hold against him. Really can't think of another all time great, that was failing 10 years in a row.

[dyukcs]

Is there really anyone who thinks Karl or Barkley are on the same level as Duncan and Hakeem?

There's room for better than Karl/Barkley/Dirk and not as good as Duncan/Hakeem. I think it's a huge stretch to put KG on that level.

[ThaRegul8r]

WTF? What's with the attitude?

It's not attitude, it's called "sarcasm." I realize it's difficult to ascertain tone from the written word alone, due to the lack of vocal inflection and other such cues, but I thought the eye-rolling smiley should have given it away.

Try looking at game 3 vs. Los Angeles for your answer.

I'm aware of Game 3. I could hardly have posted the statistics without being aware of it, seeing how I had to do the math for the true shooting percentage. Was that not due to his own performance? Was he injured?

To use an example on the opposite end of the spectrum, Reggie Miller had a stinker in Game 1 of the 2000 NBA Finals against the Los Angeles Lakers, going 1-16 (6.3%), which was worse than Malone's Game 3. However, he averaged 24.3 points on 58.8% TS including that game. And when I look at what he did in the postseason prior to that game, putting up true shooting percentages of 56.3%, 67.2%, and 57.6% in the prior series, then, yeah, I can give him some slack that he simply had a bad game. Not due to being an apologist, but because his performance dictates it. It was clearly an aberration when you look at how he performed in the postseason that year. No excuses are necessary.

But when a guy (who's supposed to be an "offensive juggernaut") puts up true shooting percentages of 49.5%, 49.4%, and 48.5% in consecutive playoff series, then at what point can one say, "Okay, he just didn't play well?" That's what I'd like to know. It seems a double standard exists, as there are people who are quick to attempt to absolve a player by placing the blame on his teammates saying they let him down, yet I notice these same people are never willing to do the converse when a player lets his teammates down due to his own subpar performance. So what does it take for someone to simply admit that a player didn't play well? I'm genuinely curious.