RealGM Top 100 List #17

[E-Balla]

I love Wade, but I'd take Admiral over him every time. Drob was such a unique talent. His career was disrupted by Navy commitments or by injury, but at his peak ,he was one of a kind. Just an awesome basketball player.

Wade could lead a team to a ring and will always show up in the postseason. Robinson.... Yeah...

There are too many variables here. Teams still respected Shaq, even though he was dragging ass. Wade had help that Finals.

What did Admiral have? Meager teammates. He got a kid out of college who could get the job done and he won two titles. Duncan doesn't win those without Admiral.

Everyone needs help. You have to take into account the setting.

Even with no help Wade was amazing. Robinson at no point did anything to dispel my concerns about him in the playoffs. The man didn't have a great offensive game.

[DayofMourning]

I keep saying Garnett comparisons, but they make absolutely no sense to me. Robinson has a vastly inferior jumper because he lacks the range out to 20 feet, he's not as good at passing, and he can't handle the ball as a pressure release guy. Heck KG has played PG at times. His back-to-the-basket game is inferior to KG's. Average passer from that position. Garnett has vastly superior offensive portability.

.

Sure I think most people would agree that offensively Admiral's edges over KG are primarily a better face up and post game and much much better at drawing fouls. But many of us are convinced that Robinson had signficantly more defensive impact than KG and its hard to argue considering every defense Admiral was ever on was at least good, most were great, and several were elite. KG of course led great defenses in Boston, but we never saw this in Minny and while I think most of would agree Robinson had slightly better defensive teammates pre-Duncan compared with KG in Minnesota not to the degree that would suggest the vast gulf in team defensive results.

But more importantly I think the comparisons to KG are less stylistic than they are 2 guys who spent the bulk of their prime playing on flawed rosters with limited talent around them. And both forced to be primary offensive options when that's probably not ideal for either one. And when you look at how their teams performed, David looks really strong in comparison with KG prime for prime and peak for peak. In fact I could make a case that David Robinson has 4-5 regular seasons every bit as good at KG's 04 which is continually lauded on this board as an all-time great year.

Now the ideas of longevity and portability are part of why KG is voted on already and Robinson isn't, but if we are taking both guys at their best 1 year, 5 years, 8 years its hard for me personally not to take Admiral.

Good stuff. Admiral is forever above KG. I appreciate what KG has done, but Admiral is one of a kind. He has KG's ass in defense. Isn't that supposed to be KG's trump card? Offensively, did KG lead the league in scoring? Drob didn't want to, but he did. Admiral is an icon. KG is damn good though.

[ronnymac2]

I keep saying Garnett comparisons, but they make absolutely no sense to me. Robinson has a vastly inferior jumper because he lacks the range out to 20 feet, he's not as good at passing, and he can't handle the ball as a pressure release guy. Heck KG has played PG at times. His back-to-the-basket game is inferior to KG's. Average passer from that position. Garnett has vastly superior offensive portability.

.

Sure I think most people would agree that offensively Admiral's edges over KG are primarily a better face up and post game and much much better at drawing fouls. But many of us are convinced that Robinson had signficantly more defensive impact than KG and its hard to argue considering every defense Admiral was ever on was at least good, most were great, and several were elite. KG of course led great defenses in Boston, but we never saw this in Minny and while I think most of would agree Robinson had slightly better defensive teammates pre-Duncan compared with KG in Minnesota not to the degree that would suggest the vast gulf in team defensive results.

But more importantly I think the comparisons to KG are less stylistic than they are 2 guys who spent the bulk of their prime playing on flawed rosters with limited talent around them. And both forced to be primary offensive options when that's probably not ideal for either one. And when you look at how their teams performed, David looks really strong in comparison with KG prime for prime and peak for peak. In fact I could make a case that David Robinson has 4-5 regular seasons every bit as good at KG's 04 which is continually lauded on this board as an all-time great year.

Now the ideas of longevity and portability are part of why KG is voted on already and Robinson isn't, but if we are taking both guys at their best 1 year, 5 years, 8 years its hard for me personally not to take Admiral.

Yeah but I'm not arguing against Robinson's defensive impact. It's his offense. I keep seeing "elite two-way player"...all I see is elite defense. Which is fine. He's not Bill Russell elite, but he's elite. Top-5 ever.

Offensively though...I wouldn't want him as my number 1 guy, and his abilities as a number 2 guy are lacking in comparison to Karl Malone. Everybody has been calling him an elite finisher, yet he isn't capable of receiving the impact and passing/playmaking that his teammates might provide the way Malone can. Malone is better at the thing Robinson is best at on offense. PLUS, Malone gives you better offensive creation in the form of superior passing, a better jumper, and a much, much better post game. And he takes care of the ball better, too. Peak Malone is one of the best ever at carrying a super high USG without turning the ball over. Robinson is not.

[Texas Chuck]

Looking at Nash in Dallas a bit more:

Nash arrived in Dallas after mostly spending 2 years on the bench in Phoenix with Kevin Johnson already entriched and Jason Kidd arriving mid-way through his rookie season. Not only did Dallas bring him in prepared to make him the starter they also rewarded him with a big contract for such an unproven player. Pressure was on and this was a team with an owner who was only interested in building the new arena, a terrible team coming off a 20 win season and who had traded their best player--Kidd. And Nash was the guy who was supposed to come in and help fix a giant mess.

Needless to say he really struggled at first and was frequently booed his first year in Dallas. Finley was a really good SG, but he also played with a rookie Dirk in over his head and trying to play SF, Gary Trent and an old AC Green and Bradley was the only real center they had. Terrible team and Nash played poorly.

The next year hardly went any better for Nash personally but the team improved a great deal. Dirk took over the PF position and had a solid 2nd year, Finley was still playing at a very high level and they got good play from Ceballos and Strickland and most importantly Cuban buys the team and its like a switch got flipped and they played really well as a team to close the season.

From 01-04 Nash was a really good RS player and the team won lots of games each year. Nash was about a 17/8 59%TS guy during this stretch. And of course ran one of the best offenses in the the league during this stretch.

So what about the playoffs. Well here is how Nash did in his elimination series in Dallas:

01 2nd round vs Spurs

33 mpg 9/6 475 TS

He couldn't outplay the aging duo of Terry Porter and Avery Johnson

02 2nd round vs Kings

40 mpg 19/9 61% TS. Other than turning the ball over a lot, played pretty well offensively but Bibby came up with 22/7 on 58%TS of his own.

03 WCF vs Spurs

39 mpg 15/7 55% TS -- and we hear he's better than Stockton because he volume scores when his team needs him do. After Dirk gets hurt, here is Nash in the next 3 games: 9/19 25 pts, 5/11 14 pts, 3/10 6 pts and his team scores 8 pts in the 4th quarter after entering it with a double-digit lead.

04 1st round against Kings

39 mpg 14/9 46% TS compared to Mike Bibby 24/5 60% TS

[Texas Chuck]

Yeah but I'm not arguing against Robinson's defensive impact. It's his offense. I keep seeing "elite two-way player"...all I see is elite defense. Which is fine. He's not Bill Russell elite, but he's elite. Top-5 ever.

Offensively though...I wouldn't want him as my number 1 guy, and his abilities as a number 2 guy are lacking in comparison to Karl Malone. Everybody has been calling him an elite finisher, yet he isn't capable of receiving the impact and passing/playmaking that his teammates might provide the way Malone can. Malone is better at the thing Robinson is best at on offense. PLUS, Malone gives you better offensive creation in the form of superior passing, a better jumper, and a much, much better post game. And he takes care of the ball better, too. Peak Malone is one of the best ever at carrying a super high USG without turning the ball over. Robinson is not.

Oh if the argument is whether or not Karl Malone is a better offensive player than Robinson I think clearly he is. I was simply trying to address the KG comparisons. Mailman imo is clearly the superior offensive player to Admiral.

[penbeast0]

Hopefully accurate this time:

Karl Malone (8) -- FJS, Doctor MJ, rich316, penbeast0, ronnymac2, batmana, PCProductions, lukekarts
Moses Malone (4) -- JordansBulls, Warspite, GC Pantalones, basketballefan
-- Thanks GC for giving me the post # to fix my ommission

David Robinson -- shutupandjam, Owly
Steve Nash -- colts18
Charles Barkley -- ShaqAttack

(I will be adding Jim Naismith and Ryoga Hibiki for the next thread as they are both active now)

[HeartBreakKid]

Back after a few days of vacation.


I'm very big on peak, so I am going to have to go with Bill Walton here. Walton's lack of consistency health wise is why I haven't voted for him sooner over some of the other folks from the 10-15 area, but I think here there is a clear gap between him and everyone else left.

Bill Walton is right up there with the top tier centers. He is a lot like Russell in that you cannot see how dominant he is just by looking at his boxscore stats. He is a team player in every sense of the word, high iq, high skill, good motor and he is large on top of all of that.

While he only had maybe 2 seasons that you could say he played the bulk of the season, he was still able to get a championship in that short window. That's pretty impressive. With modern medicine there is still no reason to assume his career would have been much different, but who knows, an extra season of health with that guy can equate to a lot of success.


Karl Malone is the polar opposite, many years of excellence. But I don't rate players based on who has a more valuable career, I rate players based on who I think is the best out there when they're on the court.

For me, Walton is a more reliable offensive player than Malone. Malone kills him in boxscore numbers, but Walton seems like he can fit in more systems while also producing franchise level impact. Perhaps he is a bit like Kevin Garnett in those regards. Walton's isolation/post game is good, I don't know if he is really that much inferior to Malone when it comes to shot creation. Walton can initiate for his offense with his high post game, while Malone is more of a finisher, though he is certainly a very good passer considering his style of play.

Defensively Walton kills Malone. Was a better rebounder, a better player in the post, way better rim protector, good help defender, he was a true anchor, an all time one at that. Malone is a complimentary defensive player, one who is good for guarding other power forwards man to man, but he doesn't seem like he an anchor a great defense.

I think it is saying something that Walton could accomplish more than Malone despite so few opportunities. While it says that it was just a strange turn of events that Malone ended up ringless, or didn't appear in the finals until very late in his career, I think it also says a lot about how dominant Walton has. Even if Walton can barely string together 3 or 4 seasons of 50 games+, I think that is 3 or 4 seasons where you have a significant chance of getting a title, about a tier higher than Malone in those regards, and I think that makes him a better player in general.


My vote goes to Bill Walton.

[ceiling raiser]

Yeah, I'm going to cast my vote for David Robinson here.

I concede that both Malones are superior offensive players, but it's really tough for me to look past the fact that neither guy consistently anchored his defense. We've established that Karl was a bit of an intimidator, and a great one-on-one post defender (though this skill is less valuable today).

In order for me to support another candidate, I think I'd need to see one of two things:

1) That Robinson's defense isn't as valuable as we're painting it to be.

2) That Robinson's seasons post-injury are a far cry from his seasons pre-injury.

As for (1), lorak posted this a few threads ago:

If we want to know if defense in playoffs performed under/over expectations, then we have to compare playoff series drtg to expected drtg (where exp drtg = (team RS drtg+opp RS ortg)/2).

Results for Spurs with Robinson (negative value is good):

Code: Select all

YEAR   OPP   DRTG
1995   LAL   -9,3
1995   DEN   -4,2
1993   PTB   -2,5
1990   PTB   -2,1
1993   PHO   -0,1
1990   DEN   1,1
1996   PHO   2,4
1995   HOU   3,0
1994   UTA   4,0
1991   GSW   4,1
1996   UTA   5,7


So 11 playoffs series, 4 times Spurs defense performed better than expected, 1 time basically at expectation level (1993) and 6 times worse than expectations. Doesn't look good for Robinson. Of course we should look closely at each series (for example I wouldn't blame DRob for 1991 as it was great coaching job by Nelson, who outcoached Larry Brown), but pattern seems rather clear.

and followed up with this post: viewtopic.php?p=40841237#p40841237

Regarding (2), I linked drza, here are some useful excerpts:

Robinson & K. Malone 1

Spoiler:

*I'll post the Karl and Robinson +/- section from the comparison post I did on them:

Malone
98: 9.0 (+8.8 ORAPM; 0.2 DRAPM)
99: 5.8 (+6.4 ORAPM; -.6 DRAPM)
00: 5.5 (+6.9 ORAPM; -1.4 DRAPM)

Robinson
98:7.4 (+1.2 ORAPM; +6.2 DRAPM)
99: 8.9 (+2.3 ORAPM; +6.6 DRAPM)
00: 8.3 (+2.7 ORAPM; +5.6 DRAPM)

For those that don't know, this data came from Doc MJ's normalized PI RAPM spreadsheet from 1998 - 2012. I only did 1998 - 2000 for both players, because we don't have +/- data in 2001 and only partial for 2002, and by 2003 both were on their last legs. I found these numbers revealing for a few reasons. Malone's value in these years was almost all offense, while Robinson's value was primarily defense.

*For those that believe 1998 to be in Karl's peak, it is interesting that his +9.0 normalized RAPM score from 1998 is almost exactly the same as Dirk's 5-year peak (+9.1) but noticeably lower than Dirk's 3-year (+10.2) and single-season (+11.5) peaks.

*Similarly, '98 Karl and '99 Robinson both had almost the exact same overall normalized RAPM score, though as mentioned Karl's was almost all offensive and Robinson's was primarily defensive.

Robinson & K. Malone 2

Spoiler:

This leaves Karl vs Robinson. And as I mentioned before, Robinson pretty much matches Malone in box score offensive production in both the regular and post seasons. Robinson's own postseason scoring efficiency questions are less harmful in a comp with the Mailman, who shares some of the same issues. But Robinson was still an exceptional defender. As Colts18 has pointed out, his career (nor his prime) really ended with the 1997 injury. In 1999 Robinson was a +9 normalized RAPM player that had clearly the highest defensive impact on the team (on a squad that won with defense first), and so much of the '99 Spurs' blazing finish and romp through the postseason was tied to their stifling defense that Robinson was spear-heading. Duncan was a beast that year, so not minimizing him at all. My point here is that 1999 helped prove that Robinson's skill set allowed him to be an elite-impact player whose impact could translate to the postseason on a team scaled up to championship caliber. Robinson's step-function added value as a rookie and the disaster of the 1997 Spurs without Robinson (even factoring in potential tanking) are further evidence of his huge value.

Malone has the monstrous longevity that's to his advantage (as he has on most players), but I believe that Robinson was just the better player. And as I weigh quantity vs quality, I keep finding myself tipped more towards what I perceive to be the quality.

Looking through the lens of Bird:

Spoiler:

Plus, because we have RAPM studies starting in 1998, we know that Robinson's RAPM from 1998 - 2000 (using Doc MJ's normalized PI RAPM method) was +7.4, +8.9, and +8.3 (with a heavy defensive influence, notching DRAPM's that match the best that we ever saw from Duncan in his career). Those overall RAPMs in the ~8.2 range couldn't quite keep up with the best-of-the-best in the study, but they were right there on average with the average of the highest three career RAPM scores of Nash (+8.2 3-year average) or Kobe (+8.0) and just below 2005 - 08 Duncan (4-year average 9.3 RAPM). Robinson wasn't playing as many minutes as any of them, so they would have had higher volume impacts on game than these years of Robinson, but the point is that Robinson appeared to be still having huge impact on games from 98 - 2001 according to both the box scores AND the +/- data.

Thus, if we return to our Bird longevity comparison, I now see it:

Bird: 9 prime years from 1980 - 1988, one full missed season (1989), 2 lesser but productive seasons (1990 and 91) and a final season when his body broke down and he couldn't finish the season

Robinson: 7 prime years from 1990 - 1996, one full missed season (1997), four more almost prime seasons on the order of 1980 - 1983 Bird (1998 - 2001), one lesser but productive season when his body broke down and he couldn't finish the season (2002) and a final season in which he was physically limited but still a strong role player.

Suddenly, Robinson's longevity looks EXACTLY like Bird's to me. And if Bird's career length is the gate-keeper for being ranked this high, suddenly Robinson is eligible. If his prime is strong enough.

I think one way of answering both is by deciding how we're going to parse out credit for the SA defense in 98, 99, 00, 01. Do we have reason to believe Duncan was the linchpin of that unit? If so, that makes Robinson a less attractive candidate here.

[ronnymac2]

I found it!

Kaima had a great response back in the day in this thread: viewtopic.php?f=64&t=790068

Before quoting his monster post rife with first-hand accounts and sources, I want to supplement it with some numbers to provide context to the Karl Malone vs. David Robinson debate.

These two superstars faced each other in 1994 and 1996 in the playoffs.

In 1994, the Spurs won 55 games and were #3 in SRS (5.05). They had an offensive rating of 110.4, good for the 4th-best offense in the league. San Antonio had HCA against Utah.

San Antonio's offense against Utah dropped to a 101.1 offensive rating, and they lost the series 3-1.

In 1996, the Spurs won 59 games and were #4 in SRS (5.97). They had an offensive rating of 110.2, good for the 9th-best offense in the league. San Antonio had HCA against Utah.

San Antonio's offense against Utah dropped to a 100.2 offensive rating, and they lost the series 4-2. Utah pummeled San Antonio, outscoring them by nearly 14 points per game. Mind you, this is after San Antonio put up a 121 ORTG against the Phoenix Suns one round earlier.

Here's why San Antonio's offense came to a screeching halt against Utah:

David, guy was unstoppable on both ends.

Really? Then why did Malone own him on both ends every time the Jazz and Spurs met in the playoffs?

The idea that David was better than Malone in their respective primes is a myth underpinned by the standard of telling a lie enough times that the masses see it as the "truth", thusly and therein perpetuating it ever further.

For all the talk about what Hakeem did to Robinson, Malone was just as vicious at stealing the Mermaid's lunch in the postseason, and did it multiple years.

Robinson also had a very weak post up game, and while Malone could score on him at will (begging the question of just how great Robinson's defense was) Robinson could not do the same against Malone's D (and yes, Malone guarded Robinson throughout those playoff series).

As the below playoff summaries will demonstrate, this was not a close matchup in their primes. If DRob is better than Malone, then I'd have to say he's better than Hakeem as well. Ridiculous, on both counts:

5/12/96
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.spor ... a973315a10


Karl Malone scored 32 points and shut down David Robinson as the Utah Jazz again smothered the San Antonio Spurs, 105-75, to take a 2-1 lead in their Western Conference semifinal series.

Jeff Hornacek scored 10 of his 17 points in a pair of decisive third-quarter bursts for the Jazz, who limited the Spurs to 75 points for the second time in the series and are allowing just 75.5 points per game in their last four post-season contests. Game Four is Sunday night at Salt Lake City.

"They were very physical with us," Spurs coach Bob Hill said. "They put us on our heels and basically the game was over. We were very apologetic, we didn't fight back, we didn't get dirty. They told us what they were going to do in the paper. They called our bluff. They put it in the paper and then they did it and we didn't respond."

Robinson, guarded by the shorter but heavier Malone for much of the game, managed just 11 points. He shot just 4-of-10 from the field and 3-of-9 from the foul line. Robinson scored just three points in the second half, when the Spurs were held to just 33.

"This is crazy," Robinson said. "It was a time when we had a good opportunity in here and today wasn't an example of good basketball. They're looking good and we haven't scored. We have to figure a way to put the ball in the basket a lot better than we have been."

GAME 4 96 SEMIS
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.spor ... 38da08c0ad

Chris Morris scored 25 points and a stifling defense held David Robinson to 11 points as the Utah Jazz routed the San Antonio Spurs, 101-86 to take a 3-1 lead in their Western Conference semifinal series.

Karl Malone added 22 points and was 10-for-10 from the free throw line for the Jazz, who travel to San Antonio for Game Five on Tuesday.

GAME 2 1994 OPENING ROUND
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.spor ... 7121f49f12

San Antonio went without a field goal in 25 attempts over a 16-minute span
of the second and third quarters Saturday, as Utah evened their playoff series at 1-1 with a 96-84 victory.

The Spurs scored just 25 points in the two middle periods, making just 5 of 34 shots.

Jay Humphries scored 12 of his 25 points as Utah took control in the second quarter, outscoring the Spurs 30-9 for a 50-33 lead. The Jazz expanded the margin to 75-49 after three quarters as San Antonio continued to misfire.

The Spurs had a franchise record-low for points in a playoff game and set a host of other NBA and club records with their poor offensive performance.

Karl Malone, despite 7-for-25 shooting from the field, had 23 points and 14 rebounds for the Jazz.

Another terrible performance for Robinson against Malone: David Robinson FG 2-14 FT 8-10 POINTS 12

GAME 1 OPENING ROUND 1994
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.spor ... 3db1ffc736

David Robinson scored 25 points and the San Antonio Spurs, 0-5 against Utah in the regular season, routed the Jazz 106-89 Thursday night in the first game of their Western Conference playoff series.

Karl Malone's 36 points weren't enough to keep the Jazz in contention, and he was the only Utah player to score in double figures as the Jazz came close to tying their record-low 80 points in a playoff game.


GAME 4 1994 OPENING ROUND
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.spor ... 420e94498c

SALT LAKE CITY (AP) -- Karl Malone scored 34 points, including a 20-footer with 42 seconds to play, and the Utah Jazz held off a late San Antonio rally to win 95-90 Thursday night, eliminating the Spurs from the NBA playoffs.

The Spurs trailed 91-84 before Dale Ellis scored and missed a free throw that Dennis Rodman tipped in, making the score 91-88. Malone then hit his key jumper to rebuild the Jazz lead back to five.

David Robinson came back with a spinning jumper, pulling the Spurs to 93-90, and they got the ball back with 12 seconds remaining. But David Benoit grabbed a loose ball and dunked just before time ran out.

In winning the best-of-5 series 3-1, Utah beat San Antonio in Salt Lake City for the 21st time in 22 games, and for the seventh time in eight games this season.

Malone also had 12 rebounds, while John Stockton had 18 assists to go with 13 points. Benoit finished with 15 points, hitting seven of nine shots.

Robinson had 27 points and 12 rebounds for San Antonio, and Ellis scored 24.

Even in games Robinson played well, Malone thoroughly outplayed him.

GAME 3 1994 OPENING ROUND

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.spor ... 3db1ffc736

SALT LAKE CITY (AP) -- Utah's second straight first-round playoff rout of San Antonio had 20,000 Jazz fans rocking. Karl Malone, however, sat out the victory dance.

He hopes to celebrate Thursday night, when Utah can wrap up its best-of-5 series with the Spurs in the Delta Center -- and avoid a Texas finale on Saturday.

"I can say that these were our best back-to-back games of the season, but they are behind us now," Malone said after scoring 24 points in Utah's 105-72 triumph Tuesday night. "The biggest game of the season is Thursday night."

Malone also grabbed 13 rebounds as the Jazz manhandled cold-shooting San Antonio, which shot just 32 percent to Utah's 53 percent.
[...]
[David Robinson] had just 16 points Tuesday night, hitting only eight of 21 shots.

-------

There are more examples out there, this is just a slapdash cut and paste from another board.

Malone>>>>DRob. And the fact that so many think exactly the opposite is just another example of how underrated Karl is on this board.

[Basketballefan]

Back after a few days of vacation.


I'm very big on peak, so I am going to have to go with Bill Walton here. Walton's lack of consistency health wise is why I haven't voted for him sooner over some of the other folks from the 10-15 area, but I think here there is a clear gap between him and everyone else left.

Bill Walton is right up there with the top tier centers. He is a lot like Russell in that you cannot see how dominant he is just by looking at his boxscore stats. He is a team player in every sense of the word, high iq, high skill, good motor and he is large on top of all of that.

While he only had maybe 2 seasons that you could say he played the bulk of the season, he was still able to get a championship in that short window. That's pretty impressive. With modern medicine there is still no reason to assume his career would have been much different, but who knows, an extra season of health with that guy can equate to a lot of success.


Karl Malone is the polar opposite, many years of excellence. But I don't rate players based on who has a more valuable career, I rate players based on who I think is the best out there when they're on the court.

For me, Walton is a more reliable offensive player than Malone. Malone kills him in boxscore numbers, but Walton seems like he can fit in more systems while also producing franchise level impact. Perhaps he is a bit like Kevin Garnett in those regards. Walton's isolation/post game is good, I don't know if he is really that much inferior to Malone when it comes to shot creation. Walton can initiate for his offense with his high post game, while Malone is more of a finisher, though he is certainly a very good passer considering his style of play.

Defensively Walton kills Malone. Was a better rebounder, a better player in the post, way better rim protector, good help defender, he was a true anchor, an all time one at that. Malone is a complimentary defensive player, one who is good for guarding other power forwards man to man, but he doesn't seem like he an anchor a great defense.

I think it is saying something that Walton could accomplish more than Malone despite so few opportunities. While it says that it was just a strange turn of events that Malone ended up ringless, or didn't appear in the finals until very late in his career, I think it also says a lot about how dominant Walton has. Even if Walton can barely string together 3 or 4 seasons of 50 games+, I think that is 3 or 4 seasons where you have a significant chance of getting a title, about a tier higher than Malone in those regards, and I think that makes him a better player in general.


My vote goes to Bill Walton.

I respect your opinion and all but you must put very little value on Longevity/durability.

We all know how good Walton was at his peak but he literally only has 2 elite seasons, and only averaged 47 games per season over his 10 year career.

I wouldn't take Walton's 2 elite seasons over guys who have 8-10 elite prime years. It just doesn't seem logical imo.

[ronnymac2]

Good stuff. Admiral is forever above KG. I appreciate what KG has done, but Admiral is one of a kind. He has KG's ass in defense. Isn't that supposed to be KG's trump card? Offensively, did KG lead the league in scoring? Drob didn't want to, but he did. Admiral is an icon. KG is damn good though.

You know what I find amusing about this? David Robinson lead the league in scoring by dropping 71 points in the final game of the 1994 REG SEA against a below average defensive team in the Clippers. One week later, he was having trouble scoring 20 points against Karl Malone's defense.

Karl Malone. The guy who people are claiming is inferior to David Robinson.

[ronnymac2]

Oh, and where is David Robinson's supposed defensive impact when matching up against Karl Malone-led squads? Because Utah's offensive ratings in their series against SAS in 1994 and 1996 were better than their REG SEA ORTGs.

In 1994, Malone does 29.3 points, 1.8 assists, 3.5 offensive rebounds, 2 turnovers, and get to the foul line 11 times per game. 56.1%TS, stingy 7.1% TOV rate. Astronomical 33.3% USG, 118 individual ORTG. Utah's ORTG in the series is 110.6.

In 1996, Malone does 25 points, 4.7 assists, 2.6 offensive rebounds, 2.2 turovers, and gets to the foul line 7.6 times per game. 49.3%TS, stingy 7.9% TOV rate. Astronomical 34.8% USG, 108 individual ORTG. Utah's ORTG in the series is 114.1!

Malone was capable of shouldering immense USG% against strong playoff defenses to put his role players in good positions. Sometimes his scoring efficiency dipped, and for sure that should count against him, but the fact is that he actually shouldered those loads and took on that responsibility, which is something David Robinson didn't or couldn't do, at least not against Karl Malone's post defense. And the fact that Malone took on that offensive role helped against a lot of teams, including the David Robinson-led Spur defense.

What's the argument for Robinson over KM at all really? Malone beat him badly at their peaks. Malone has the huge longevity edge. It's like people say "Well, Robinson only underperformed against Hakeem Olajuwon who was truly great, it shouldn't count too much against Robinson" to downplay the fact that Robinson got even more severely outplayed by a player inferior to Olajuwon in Karl Malone.

[Texas Chuck]

Ronny,

interesting stuff on Malone/Robinson.

And if we take it further to the 54 times they faced each in the RS we find:

Malone 39 mpg 24/11/3 47/76
Robinson 36 mpg 19/10/3 51/73 Also worth mentioning 2 more blocks per game

Spurs 30-24 in those games.


So its pretty close with a box score edge to Mailman for sure, but some of Admiral's team defensive impact is showing up in the w/l results.

My question tho is does this mean Malone is a better player overall than Robinson or that he simply is a bad matchup for David due to his strength advantages. So I looked at how they each fared against some other big men.

Malone v Dream in the RS 36-32 w/l, 25/11 vs 24/11 for Dream. Malone shot better. Dream had monster defensive stats.

Robinson v Dream in the RS 30-12 w/l 20/11 vs 22/11 for Dream. Admiral shot way better and assists, steals, blocks virtually the same. This shocks me considering the story line is always how Dream dominated Admiral, but that obviously is based on one series and not on any kind of reality.

Malone V Ewing 17-12 27/11 vs 20/11 for Ewing. Percentages close, defensive stats of course favor Ewing.

Robinson v Ewing 12-7 23/9 vs 20/10 for Ewing, Robinson shoots way better percentages.


So this makes me think maybe Malone was a bit of bad matchup for Robinson because against other top big men of the day he more than holds his own.

[colts18]

Oh, and where is David Robinson's supposed defensive impact when matching up against Karl Malone-led squads? Because Utah's offensive ratings in their series against SAS in 1994 and 1996 were better than their REG SEA ORTGs.

In 1994, Malone does 29.3 points, 1.8 assists, 3.5 offensive rebounds, 2 turnovers, and get to the foul line 11 times per game. 56.1%TS, stingy 7.1% TOV rate. Astronomical 33.3% USG, 118 individual ORTG. Utah's ORTG in the series is 110.6.

In 1996, Malone does 25 points, 4.7 assists, 2.6 offensive rebounds, 2.2 turovers, and gets to the foul line 7.6 times per game. 49.3%TS, stingy 7.9% TOV rate. Astronomical 34.8% USG, 108 individual ORTG. Utah's ORTG in the series is 114.1!

Malone's numbers vs Robinson

96: 25 PPG, .493 TS%, 108 O rating

98: 24.6 PPG, .463 TS%, 94 O rating

Looks to me like Robinson did a good job on Malone

[ronnymac2]

Oh, and where is David Robinson's supposed defensive impact when matching up against Karl Malone-led squads? Because Utah's offensive ratings in their series against SAS in 1994 and 1996 were better than their REG SEA ORTGs.

In 1994, Malone does 29.3 points, 1.8 assists, 3.5 offensive rebounds, 2 turnovers, and get to the foul line 11 times per game. 56.1%TS, stingy 7.1% TOV rate. Astronomical 33.3% USG, 118 individual ORTG. Utah's ORTG in the series is 110.6.

In 1996, Malone does 25 points, 4.7 assists, 2.6 offensive rebounds, 2.2 turovers, and gets to the foul line 7.6 times per game. 49.3%TS, stingy 7.9% TOV rate. Astronomical 34.8% USG, 108 individual ORTG. Utah's ORTG in the series is 114.1!

Malone's numbers vs Robinson

96: 25 PPG, .493 TS%, 108 O rating

98: 24.6 PPG, .463 TS%, 94 O rating

Looks to me like Robinson did a good job on Malone

1998...Malone has Ostertag and Adam who gives a **** next to him...Robinson has Tim Duncan. Malone took on Jordan-level USG that series at 38.1%...Robinson still sucks offensively by shooting under 40% from the field and committing 2.6 turnovers with only 1.6 assists.

Put up Robinson's stats in 1996 and see what happens...

[magicmerl]

By the metrics (used here) Robinson has the best peak, whilst Karl has the longevity.

You voted for Robinson, so presumably that means you favour peak over productivity. I am a massive fan of David, and voted for him in an earlier round of this project. But the thing I found when I looked closer was that at David's peak (94-96), Karl Malone was demonstrably better.

In 94 they met each other in the playoffs, with Karl winning the series and individual matchup decisively.
In 95 they each were dispatched by Hakeem, but Karl performed far better in his loss than David did (the infamours 'MVP' series).
In 96 they again met in the playoffs, and again Karl won the series and the individual matchup.

That's the period that is the reason why you are choosing David over Karl Malone.

And that's the reason why I changed my vote from David Robinson to Karl Malone.

[lorak]

I keep seeing Malone comparisons, but they make absolutely no sense to me. Again, Robinson's jumper isn't as good, and he's not nearly the passer or power post-up threat. Malone has a very strong back-to-the-basket low post game to pair with a jumper. Malone is even better as a pick-n-roll option because he can dive toward the rim like Robinson, hit a jumper better than Robinson,

That's all not true. Robinson was able to drive toward the rim better than Malone and was comparable jump shooter to Malone. The main difference is who created opportunities for them and that affected their percentages. NBA.com has data since 1997 season and since then Malone's FG% from midrange was 42.6 and Robinson's 39.4. So at first glance looks like Karl was better, but lets look at context:

1. Malone played with Stockton and Hornacek: one great and other very good offensive player. On the other hand Robinson played with Avery, old Terry Porter and young Tony Parker. Guess who had more good, open looks created?

2. To follow up point above: Spurs perimeter players were so bad, that Duncan as a rookie was among top 2 players who the most often assisted Robinson - in a couple of seasons he was even the one with the most passes to DRob.

3. Malone was assisted on 79.1% of his baskets, Robinson 68.5%. So it's consistent with observation from watching the tape, that DRob had to create more often for himself, while for Malone most of the work was done by Stockton (who past his prime assisted Malone as often as prime Nash assisted Amare) and Hornacek.

So in fact Robinson as a scorer is even more impressive than Malone, because he played with worse offensive perimeter players, who were unable to create so often and so good looks as Stockton and later Hornacek for Malone. It's really impressive that in that environment DRob was +20 ppg scorer and 58.3 TS% players (better than Malone!).

----------------------
Another point to discussion about Stockton and Malone (really sad most Malone's voters ignores Stockton). I've looked at clutch (5min, +/- 5pts) from nba.com and while Karl's scoring was basically the same as during regular season, Stockton's role clearly increased, what IMO suggests that he was more important than some of Malone's voters think.

Code: Select all


all numbers per 100 possessions (both played 51 minutes per100 in the clutch)

Stockton   FGA   FG%   FTA   FT%   REB   AST   TOV   PTS   +/-   TS%   TSA
CLUTCH   17,2   44,0   12,8   84,4   4,6   13,5   3,3   27,3   14,4   0,598   22,8
REGULAR   15,1   51,2   6,3   83,7   3,8   15,2   4,4   21,8   ?   0,610   17,9
                                 
                                 
                                 
Malone   FGA   FG%   FTA   FT%   REB   AST   TOV   PTS   +/-   TS%   TSA
CLUTCH   25,7   49,5   14,6   77,7   14,3   4,7   2,9   36,8   14,4   0,574   32,1
REGULAR   25,5   50,2   12,7   77,8   13,3   6,2   4,3   35,5   ?   0,571   31,1




It's really amazing how much Stockton's role as a scorer increased in the clutch (5 more true shots attempts!), while at the same time he was still elite creator. And on the contrary to popular opinion Malone was quite good in the clutch, in some years he even shot +80% from FT line.

[ronnymac2]

Ronny,

interesting stuff on Malone/Robinson.

And if we take it further to the 54 times they faced each in the RS we find:

Malone 39 mpg 24/11/3 47/76
Robinson 36 mpg 19/10/3 51/73 Also worth mentioning 2 more blocks per game

Spurs 30-24 in those games.


So its pretty close with a box score edge to Mailman for sure, but some of Admiral's team defensive impact is showing up in the w/l results.

My question tho is does this mean Malone is a better player overall than Robinson or that he simply is a bad matchup for David due to his strength advantages. So I looked at how they each fared against some other big men.

Malone v Dream in the RS 36-32 w/l, 25/11 vs 24/11 for Dream. Malone shot better. Dream had monster defensive stats.

Robinson v Dream in the RS 30-12 w/l 20/11 vs 22/11 for Dream. Admiral shot way better and assists, steals, blocks virtually the same. This shocks me considering the story line is always how Dream dominated Admiral, but that obviously is based on one series and not on any kind of reality.

Malone V Ewing 17-12 27/11 vs 20/11 for Ewing. Percentages close, defensive stats of course favor Ewing.

Robinson v Ewing 12-7 23/9 vs 20/10 for Ewing, Robinson shoots way better percentages.


So this makes me think maybe Malone was a bit of bad matchup for Robinson because against other top big men of the day he more than holds his own.

This is not a good thing for Robinson when we're comparing Malone and Robinson.

[Texas Chuck]

Ronny,

Im aware its not a good thing in a direct comparison, but considering how relatively few games they played against each other in the overall scope of their careers, you can understand me wanting to look beyond the H2H match in determining who I think is the better player. And since part of the knock against David is his relatively poor playoff performances I wanted to test the theory to see if he was dominating against inferior players in the RS, but struggling when he faced the best big men.

But that's not what Im finding. He outplayed both Dream and Ewing in the RS, so I don't think thats the issue. Maybe he can't handle the pressure, maybe his lack of a solid #2 option hurts more in the playoffs, etc. I'm in search of more data.

Im debating between these 2 guys so I don't want to over-react to the H2H.

[Notanoob]

Back after a few days of vacation.


I'm very big on peak, so I am going to have to go with Bill Walton here. Walton's lack of consistency health wise is why I haven't voted for him sooner over some of the other folks from the 10-15 area, but I think here there is a clear gap between him and everyone else left.

Bill Walton is right up there with the top tier centers. He is a lot like Russell in that you cannot see how dominant he is just by looking at his boxscore stats. He is a team player in every sense of the word, high iq, high skill, good motor and he is large on top of all of that.

While he only had maybe 2 seasons that you could say he played the bulk of the season, he was still able to get a championship in that short window. That's pretty impressive. With modern medicine there is still no reason to assume his career would have been much different, but who knows, an extra season of health with that guy can equate to a lot of success.


Karl Malone is the polar opposite, many years of excellence. But I don't rate players based on who has a more valuable career, I rate players based on who I think is the best out there when they're on the court.

For me, Walton is a more reliable offensive player than Malone. Malone kills him in boxscore numbers, but Walton seems like he can fit in more systems while also producing franchise level impact. Perhaps he is a bit like Kevin Garnett in those regards. Walton's isolation/post game is good, I don't know if he is really that much inferior to Malone when it comes to shot creation. Walton can initiate for his offense with his high post game, while Malone is more of a finisher, though he is certainly a very good passer considering his style of play.

Defensively Walton kills Malone. Was a better rebounder, a better player in the post, way better rim protector, good help defender, he was a true anchor, an all time one at that. Malone is a complimentary defensive player, one who is good for guarding other power forwards man to man, but he doesn't seem like he an anchor a great defense.

I think it is saying something that Walton could accomplish more than Malone despite so few opportunities. While it says that it was just a strange turn of events that Malone ended up ringless, or didn't appear in the finals until very late in his career, I think it also says a lot about how dominant Walton has. Even if Walton can barely string together 3 or 4 seasons of 50 games+, I think that is 3 or 4 seasons where you have a significant chance of getting a title, about a tier higher than Malone in those regards, and I think that makes him a better player in general.


My vote goes to Bill Walton.

I'm stunned to see someone else vote for Walton. I would have been arguing for him for some time now if I gave him any shot at getting in.

I'd vote for Robinson after him, ahead of the Malones and Chuck.

Vote: Bill Walton