trex_8063 wrote:Largest criticisms of Malone are that his lack of iso-scoring ability causes him to disappear in the playoffs, though if we look at his playoff performance over an extended-prime (some peri-prime) sample ('88-'03--->SIXTEEN YEARS, which is insane, btw), his per 100 possessions in playoffs are:
34.7 pts/14.4 reb/4.2 ast/1.7 stl/1.0 blk/3.8 tov on .530 TS%.
22.3 PER while avg a big 41.5 mpg in the playoffs......again: over SIXTEEN YEARS.
Is this a drop-off from his rs? Yes it is. But two points to make: 1) the above is still relatively elite,
Is it? That's around league-average scoring efficiency and his postseason ORTG is 106, or more fairly, 108 from 86-98. Volume scoring at that level of efficacy isn't really elite. League average ORTG was 107.5 from 86-98. That really isn't a depiction of elite offense. In fact, it's definitively mediocre. Now, if you look at that ORTG and then his postseason ORTG (to account for the drop-off in league average after 93), we see Malone is under league average in 7 of those seasons, bang-on in 98, and better in the rest. He had some pretty impressive runs. in 89, 92, 94 and 95 (3, 16, 16 and 5 games, respectively). There's a noticeable drop-off from 96-98, too: he was really a lot less effective in the playoffs THEN compared to earlier in his career (especially if you snip his first couple of seasons).
Prime Malone, let's say from 88-95, averaged roughly 111 ORTG in the playoffs which, while worse than his RS numbers, is still pretty good stuff.
In other words, we have some issue with remembering mid-30s Karl Malone and his playoff performances there guiding his reputation.
Jordan wasn't at his stellar peak in those same years either. I'll use him as an example for a while as a means to discuss playoff performance decline and such.
He was a 58% TS, 120 ORTG player over his Chicago career in the RS. In the playoffs, 56.8% and 118. In the 96-98 playoffs, 27.3 PER, 54.3% TS and 118 ORTG (against 35.1% USG and 7.4% TOV). In that same stretch (96-98), he was at 27.4 PER, 56.0% TS and 119 ORTG. That's the ultra-elite, that's like the truly remarkable stuff. Jordan was deviating so far from league average that even in the playoffs as he was grinding away against good defenses, he was still ridiculous. Come the Finals:
96: 53.8% TS, 116 ORTG, 31.0% USG (team ORTG 111.3, pace 83.5)
97: 53.2% TS, 113 ORTG, 37.9% USG (team ORTG 104.6, pace 84.0)
98: 51.6% TS, 111 ORTG,
41.2% USG (team ORTG 105.5, pace 82.0)
Talk about grinder matchups. So what we're seeing here is that the generally-accepted GOAT had some troubles against wicked defenses in the playoffs and that scoring efficiency isn't the only marker we should be using when evaluating these things. Of course, it behooves one to look at those insane usage numbers and his playmaking ability, the pace, etc, etc, so there is a bit more to it, but it provides at least a glance at what the GOAT was doing at the pinnacle of the season in his mid-30s.
As I reviewed these numbers, and Malone's, I've begun to revise my opinion of his playoff career a little. Not a ton, because I've watched a lot of Malone's games and such, but I think I was as guilty of any of over-weighting his Finals years in my evaluation. Two years in his mid-30s, MVP one of them or not, and playing in that kind of environment against that kind of defense isn't exactly a great way to look awesome. He had his struggles and he wasn't a generally brilliant playoff performer, but maybe not quite as bad as the raw averages indicate.
OK. So we know his scoring dropped off, and that's pretty consistent for him. He really wasn't anywhere near as good a scorer in the postseason compared to the RS, and that theme extends through most of his career. His overall offensive value fluctuated from year to year, but because he could draw fouls, hit the offensive boards and really developed his passing game, he was able to contribute in a bunch of different ways. He didn't really fit into the equation earlier in this list, but he's in a great mix with his peers right now, a place where he can be competitive.
Against other guys whose role was to be a primary offensive player and who performed more effectively in the playoffs, though, I'm not sure that he quite stands up. Malone fit into Utah's style of defense, but I think some are overplaying his defensive value, especially later on in his career. The 98 Jazz were 17th out of 29 in the league defensively, and they weren't regularly facing tons of dominant scoring 4s. Old Barkley didn't seem to have a ton of trouble scoring against Malone in the first round in 98, for example. He shot almost 4% BETTER against the Jazz than he'd managed in the RS, floundering more at the line than anything else, although Utah did a good job of keeping him away from the offensive glass and Malone was a significant part of that. Tim Duncan did just fine against the Jazz that year. I could go on, but to make a long story short, Malone was a decent defender, but not to an extent that really shifts things in his favor against a dominant offensive player, in my view, especially one who maintains in the PS.
and 2) that this is enough of a drop from rs that he'll continue to take criticism ad nauseam is a good indicator just how good his rs performance was.
This is definitely a fair point; Malone was a RS beast, to be sure. He was quite impressive and it's good that he's in this discussion in general.
For the above reasons, though, I think I'm gonna slide on Malone just a little as I re-evaluate things a little. This is the right range for him in my view, but while I respect his durability, his offensive longevity and the fact that his prime playoff performance is actually better than we seem to recall/discuss as we over-focus on the Finals years, I think I'm going to lean towards a much more offensively dominant and versatile player with a stronger postseason resume.
I vote for Jerry West.
I'll probably be in a tizzy trying to sort out Dirk/Malone/Doc after this, so we'll see. But for now, The Logo.
