Is Karl Malone massively overrated ?

[MisterWestside]

And? Yeah, Olajuwon's back made sure he didn't age as well as did Malone and of course sharing the ball with different players dropped his usage. Not sure the point of that comment. He also didn't have the same kind of support structure (coaching, playmaker, role) for point of comparison. 96, Olajuwon was a 22.4 ppg player on 54.4% TS / 101 ORTG in the playoffs. 97, 62.8% TS, 121 ORTG, 23.1 ppg. In those seasons, he was 33 and 34, which is still late.

Your original comment made it seem as if post-prime Olajuwon (96-02) was still ahead of Malone in his finals runs (97-98). I was simply showing that he wasn't. True points about the back and sharing the ball, yes. But you would still like for him (if you're assuming his skills didn't slip) to be a bit more efficient, especially since he wasn't so much the focal point of his teams post-95. Of course other factors can affect efficiency as well, but he was naturally trending downward as he got older, save for the occasional flashes of brilliance (like '97). Besides, you gotta factor in both the good and the bad here, such as the fact that he dropped like a rock after '97.

That's a pretty significant difference over that level of usage, further reinforcing my point.

Didn't deny that it was significant; my argument was pertaining to the perceived gap in production. Although as I stated earlier, you could also factor in that Malone perhaps played stingier defenses, on average (still verfying this), so that gap could actually be a little closer.

Russell, though, led defenses that quite literally lapped the field in his era and his teams won on that basis. That's something else, really special.

Of course. That doesn't help me answer the question I posed, though.

[tsherkin]

Your original comment made it seem as if post-prime Olajuwon (96-02) was still ahead of Malone in his finals runs (97-98).

Eh? I was talking the entire time about his 94 and 95 runs, how would you infer that?

Of course. That doesn't help me answer the question I posed, though.

Surely not, but the comment I quoted was unrelated to the other debate. Just conversation.

[MisterWestside]

Gotcha. I think I was thrown off by this comment:

Olajuwon, playoff performance, WITH decline phase:

So I thought that you strictly referring to his post -95 playoff seasons. Apologies.

[tsherkin]

Gotcha. I think I was thrown off by this comment:

Olajuwon, playoff performance, WITH decline phase:

So I thought that you strictly referring to his post -95 playoff seasons. Apologies.

Oh, my bad. I was just showing that the gap was there even with the decline phase, but I specifically meant to focus on their relevant performances. Malone aged better, but he also had more playmaking support and a well-oiled system upon which to rely, while Olajuwon had back problems and a desperate gamble on Barkley, etc, etc. That said, Malone's lack of reliance on athleticism was actually a plus for his longevity. Olajuwon's mobility was a big part of his game, naturally, it's part of what enabled his game (especially face-up action) but it's also why we saw tail-off as his mid-30s finally ushered in the reality of aging (though exacerbated by team).