Swap Karl Malone with Kevin Garnett

[OhayoKD]

And Karl Malone was a very good/underrated defensive player.

"Very good?" Yes.

"Underrated?" No.

He made 4 All-Defensive teams. People knew he was a proficient man defender. He was not an especially good help defender, certainly not anchor-level. That's the only real blowback he gets on D. He was an extremely adept man defender in the post and he was a good defensive rebounder. But that has diminishing returns. Enough so that he was not underrated in that respect. Everyone knew what his defensive strength was during his career. It was even discussed often during his final year with LA during that season.

This is just an unnecessary rabbit hole.

KG's offense and defense combined sees his team drop-off more than Malone's offense and defense combined, consistently by pretty much any avaiable approach to measure it. Why does it matter if Karl Malone's defense is underrated or overrated. There is no evidence that Malone's offense is enough to outdo KG's defense and no one has provided any sort of analyses suggesting a player with Malone's skills would be expected to win moree than a player with KG's. Oh, and KG actually won for those who care about that bit.

That we are basically fighting for the last few pages over scoring and rebounds without any sort of defensive comparison(There is tracking for that I can probably find if anyone's curious) speaks volumes really.

We don't humor Kobe vs Duncan just because Kobe scored more, won 5 rings, and made more finals.

But people will take Dirk, Malone, or whatever flavor of the thread and force a comparison to KG without actually offering any meaningful positive evidence(ie: logically leads to whatever they're claiming), for seemingly no other reason than wanting them to be comparable.

Uncertainty is inofitself not an argument. There is no evidence in Malone's favor. And until some is produced, the correct answer is "KG is likely better and will likely do better in any like for like hypothetical". KG also played in a league with twice the foreign talent but something something tough era something.

[Ancalagon]

And Karl Malone was a very good/underrated defensive player.

"Very good?" Yes.

"Underrated?" No.

He made 4 All-Defensive teams. People knew he was a proficient man defender. He was not an especially good help defender, certainly not anchor-level. That's the only real blowback he gets on D. He was an extremely adept man defender in the post and he was a good defensive rebounder. But that has diminishing returns. Enough so that he was not underrated in that respect. Everyone knew what his defensive strength was during his career. It was even discussed often during his final year with LA during that season.

This is just an unnecessary rabbit hole.

KG's offense and defense combined sees his team drop-off more than Malone's offense and defense combined, consistently by pretty much any avaiable approach to measure it. Why does it matter if Karl Malone's defense is underrated or overrated. There is no evidence that Malone's offense is enough to outdo KG's defense and no one has provided any sort of analyses suggesting a player with Malone's skills would be expected to win moree than a player with KG's. Oh, and KG actually won for those who care about that bit.

That we are basically fighting for the last few pages over scoring and rebounds without any sort of defensive comparison(There is tracking for that I can probably find if anyone's curious) speaks volumes really.

We don't humor Kobe vs Duncan just because Kobe scored more, won 5 rings, and made more finals.

But people will take Dirk, Malone, or whatever flavor of the thread and force a comparison to KG without actually offering any meaningful positive evidence(ie: logically leads to whatever they're claiming), for seemingly no other reason than wanting them to be comparable.

Uncertainty is inofitself not an argument. There is no evidence in Malone's favor. And until some is produced, the correct answer is "KG is likely better and will likely do better in any like for like hypothetical". KG also played in a league with twice the foreign talent but something something tough era something.

Hate to break it to you, but they played in the same league and same era. This isn’t Bob Cousy vs. Tyrese Haliburton here.

[OhayoKD]

"Very good?" Yes.

"Underrated?" No.

He made 4 All-Defensive teams. People knew he was a proficient man defender. He was not an especially good help defender, certainly not anchor-level. That's the only real blowback he gets on D. He was an extremely adept man defender in the post and he was a good defensive rebounder. But that has diminishing returns. Enough so that he was not underrated in that respect. Everyone knew what his defensive strength was during his career. It was even discussed often during his final year with LA during that season.

This is just an unnecessary rabbit hole.

KG's offense and defense combined sees his team drop-off more than Malone's offense and defense combined, consistently by pretty much any avaiable approach to measure it. Why does it matter if Karl Malone's defense is underrated or overrated. There is no evidence that Malone's offense is enough to outdo KG's defense and no one has provided any sort of analyses suggesting a player with Malone's skills would be expected to win moree than a player with KG's. Oh, and KG actually won for those who care about that bit.

That we are basically fighting for the last few pages over scoring and rebounds without any sort of defensive comparison(There is tracking for that I can probably find if anyone's curious) speaks volumes really.

We don't humor Kobe vs Duncan just because Kobe scored more, won 5 rings, and made more finals.

But people will take Dirk, Malone, or whatever flavor of the thread and force a comparison to KG without actually offering any meaningful positive evidence(ie: logically leads to whatever they're claiming), for seemingly no other reason than wanting them to be comparable.

Uncertainty is inofitself not an argument. There is no evidence in Malone's favor. And until some is produced, the correct answer is "KG is likely better and will likely do better in any like for like hypothetical". KG also played in a league with twice the foreign talent but something something tough era something.

Hate to break it to you, but they played in the same league and same era. This isn’t Bob Cousy vs. Tyrese Haliburton here.

As I said, foreign NBA talent quite literally more than doubled between 1998 and 2003. So no. Not really.

[tsherkin]

This is just an unnecessary rabbit hole.

KG's offense and defense combined sees his team drop-off more than Malone's offense and defense combined, consistently by pretty much any avaiable approach to measure it. Why does it matter if Karl Malone's defense is underrated or overrated. There is no evidence that Malone's offense is enough to outdo KG's defense and no one has provided any sort of analyses suggesting a player with Malone's skills would be expected to win moree than a player with KG's. Oh, and KG actually won for those who care about that bit.

Unclear why you're quoting me for this, tbh. I was responding to a particular remark about Malone, a point you don't even see as relevant.

We don't humor Kobe vs Duncan just because Kobe scored more, won 5 rings, and made more finals.

In the main because he had Shaq for his first 4 Finals appearances and first 3 titles, I suspect. Duncan didn't have the luxury, and most/many recognize that.

But people will take Dirk, Malone, or whatever flavor of the thread and force a comparison to KG without actually offering any meaningful positive evidence(ie: logically leads to whatever they're claiming), for seemingly no other reason than wanting them to be comparable.

Mmmm. I think it's in the main that Garnett won only after reducing his offensive role and coming together with an extremely high-end team, though that certainly lends itself to the "anti-KG is RINGZ-rooted" type discussion.

the correct answer is "KG is likely better and will likely do better in any like for like hypothetical".

No, that's not certain. The Jazz had a fairly specific deficiency, and defense wasn't the issue, so the drop-off in finishg/scoring/volume supported is actually of some consequence, particularly since Garnett never showed himself capable of winning in the absence of higher-order perimeter scoring talent than the Jazz ever had during Malone's career. There's very much room for debate.