RealGM

Which player was better in their respective prime?

David.

David, guy was unstoppable on both ends.

Regardless of how I look at it, I always come back to selecting David Robinson. More athletic, quicker, better motor and just had a much better feel for the game. Malone was a force of brutal and raw power who outmuscled everyone at his position. David could beat you in more ways than that;

- Hook shot
- Dribble penetration
- Spin moves
- Facials

IMO, David never played selfish ball during his career. He could easily have put up 33-35 PPG during his prime. But he was a two-way player who always gave his team the correct effort. Exactly like his young 1998 front-court mate; Tim Duncan.

Baller 24 wrote: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.

weak post-up game? lol. Actually David Robinson was a better player than Hakeem in their primes . . . . during the regular season. He won the statistical battles though they were close and his teams consistentley kicked Houston's butts throughout his career. Hakeem, though, owned him in a couple of key playoff series and upped his game in the playoffs so he is the better player.

As for Karl Malone, he was a great player but not up to Robinson's prime. Career, he was better than Robinson, he played at his top level for a LOT more years, was NEVER injured or took time off, and was the 2nd greatest PF in NBA history. Issue here isn't whether Malone is underrated, it is how silly you look saying David Robinson wasn't a dominant player

. . . and you could get clippings from Jordan's career of weak nights the same way. Heck, LaBradford Smith outplayed him once during LB's inconsistent rookie year ... then made the mistake of boasting about it and Jordan destroyed him the next time and he was out of the league within 5. If you want real heads-up numbers, try breaking down the numbers from just 1990-96 for head to head games (career, Robinson after his knee injury was not the same player and the OP said primes)

http://www.basketball-reference.com/fc/ ... =malonka01

Morten Jensen wrote:Regardless of how I look at it, I always come back to selecting David Robinson. More athletic, quicker, better motor and just had a much better feel for the game. Malone was a force of brutal and raw power who outmuscled everyone at his position. David could beat you in more ways than that;

Bull. ****.

Malone was both more physically imposing and fundamentally sound than Robinson. David was more purely athletic, but he relied too much on his physical gifts and a decent 15 foot jumper -- his post game was pure trash compared to Malone's, which is a big reason why he had multiple playoff series in his PRIME against Karl where he literally averaged barely and, in 1994, below 20 ppg. Malone averaged around 30 ppg, FYI.

penbeast0 wrote:weak post-up game? lol.

It if anything's laughable, it's your inability to directly debate -- rather than dismiss -- a point.

Robinson's post game was weak compared to other star post players like Dream and Mail, which is a big reason why he got his ass handed to him by both of them in the playoffs.

Hakeem, though, owned him in a couple of key playoff series and upped his game in the playoffs so he is the better player.

A couple of key playoff series? It was one playoff series, and anybody who watched it knows who the better peak player was.

The fact that you don't even know how many times they played in the playoffs is telling as to your alacrity and base knowledge on this matter. The lack.

On that same note, Hakeem is a guiding light for standardizing this debate: the fact that you think Robinson was better than both Malone and Hakeem at his peak, despite consistently lacking playoff numbers against them, sums things up rather nicely as to your skewed perspective. As I predicted in the original post.

As for Karl Malone, he was a great player but not up to Robinson's prime.

Which is of course why Malone dominated Robinson in their primes. Right.

Makes perfect sense.

. . and you could get clippings from Jordan's career of weak nights the same way. Heck, LaBradford Smith outplayed him once during LB's inconsistent rookie year ... then made the mistake of boasting about it and Jordan destroyed him the next time and he was out of the league within 5.

So Robinson's Michael Jordan, while Malone is John Doe journeyman?!?

Horrid comparison. Though not surprising considering the empty shill job you're trying for Robinson.

Malone didn't just dominate Robinson on a couple of off nights, he did so for years, spanning multiple playoff series.

On the Jordan matter, I'd like you to find me multiple playoff series featuring Jordan v another backcourt player that Jordan was statistically dominated in over the course. We both know you won't find such a series.

Just as you won't find a series where Karl Malone or Hakeem Olajuwon were dominated positionally in their primes. With Robinson, however, this happened in arguably his three best seasons (94-KM, 95-HO, 96-KM).

And as far as the back half of your last paragraph, when did Robinson ever "destroy" Malone (you know, like holding him to 11 points per over the course of multiple playoff matchups)? NEVER.

If Robinson was clearly better -- as opposed to inarguably lesser -- it is rather odd that he could never show it head to head in the playoffs. Further, it's even more bizarre that Malone didn't just hold his own, but took a wrecking ball to SA's franchise cornerstone in those playoff series.

Unless of course, we look at it logically: head to head, prime versus prime, David Robinson was inferior to Karl Malone. Just as it was with Hakeem.

Since you edited this in...

penbeast0 wrote: If you want real heads-up numbers, try breaking down the numbers from just 1990-96 for head to head games (career, Robinson after his knee injury was not the same player and the OP said primes)

http://www.basketball-reference.com/fc/ ... =malonka01

Look at their playoff numbers. Malone dominated Robinson in both 1994 and 1996.

Though evidently those numbers are to be dismissed.

Fantastic logic on your part.

30 points per versus 19 a game is not really close. Which is why I'd assume you try and dismiss such cumulative stats as insignificant or a "freak" occurrence -- a freak occurrence that took place in the majority of post-season games the two played against each other, and sealed SA's fate against Utah.

ok, comparing their post games. Robinson was much the taller player, and not that much weaker. He relied on a variety of moves in the post, mainly turnarounds and drop steps but didn't have the one dominant move. He could move outside and often did but his bread and butter was inside and he was a consistent 25ppg scorer at a roughly .530fg% . . . not a weak post game by anyone's measure.

Karl Malone, on the other hand, had two go to moves, though he also had a variety of alternatives he could call on (you don't get to the HOF with a limited variety in your game . . . unless you are Shaq). He lived off the pick and roll, spinning to the basket for dunks and layups or out for a 10-15 foot fallaway. In a straight up post duel, he relied on his fallaway which got excellent separation, though he would muscle weaker players (a list on which David Robinson would not appear).

Defensively, Malone was a strong post defender capable of muscling his man off his sweet spot, but not a great shotblocker. Robinson was not as physical but made up for it with his much greater reach and timing, one of the great shotblockers of his day both on and off the ball.

That's the best scouting report I can give you, Malone had the more dominant post move but Robinson matched him with more variety and size, Robinson was the better post defender. If you want statistical evidence, use the above link and if you can find a shot location chart for that period (I don't know if they exist in the public domain), you can add that into your analysis.

Oh, and the word "alacrity" probably doesn't mean what you think it does based on your usage.

Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) - Cite This Source - Share This
a

penbeast0 wrote:ok, comparing their post games. Robinson was much the taller player, and not that much weaker.

Robinson had a great looking frame. But your statements here lead me to believe that you're either prevaricating or simply didn't watch the two face off in the post-season, because Robinson was most assuredly intimidated and dominated by Malone's physicality in the post. Offensively and defensively.

Further, Robinson never did live up to his body. He was always known as soft. And with good reason.

He relied on a variety of moves in the post, mainly turnarounds and drop steps but didn't have the one dominant move.

In other words, he didn't have a single go to move. Which is another way of saying he was a weak post player, relative to the star standard purely.

He could move outside and often did but his bread and butter was inside and he was a consistent 25ppg scorer at a roughly .530fg% . . . not a weak post game by anyone's measure.

It's harder to post and score in the playoffs, which is why Robinson had some very bad playoff series against superior post players.

Which gets back to the point of one-off games you were trying to make, i.e. regular season versus playoffs -- regular season matchups tell you less because of that very same measure; in other words, your argument is one that works, but only against your broader outlook.

Malone's dominance of Robinson over the course of a week to two weeks of games in the playoffs tells us quite a bit about who the better peak player was.

Robinson wasn't as good an outside (as related to post players) shooter or inside presence as Malone. He put up brilliant numbers in the regular season because of his great athleticism, but the playoffs are a different beast: teams and individuals dig in and focus on key weaknesses, which with Robinson was his post up game.

In all reality, Robinson was a limited scoring option. Again, your point on one-off games was a good one, but only in discrediting your defense of Robinson when taken into the logical venue of regular season versus playoff games (i.e. one and dones versus do or die series).

Karl Malone, on the other hand, had two go to moves, though he also had a variety of alternatives he could call on (you don't get to the HOF with a limited variety in your game . . . unless you are Shaq).

In many ways Robinson is a mirror to Shaq, which Robinson got away with because of his good Christian image and the Navy cliche of responsibility and hard work. Image versus reality again. Which is the reason Robinson's legacy is inflated.

He did not improve himself, and relied too much his physical gifts in place of improving his fundamentals.

Unlike Shaq, Robinson's post-season play always made me see him as a regular season paper tiger that was looking for somebody to play second fiddle to in the playoffs. Before Duncan, he simply allowed that presence to be more dominant post players on the other team.

Doc Rivers made mention of this lack of leadership ability from Robinson. It does make me wonder if he sees the same strains in KG.

he would muscle weaker players (a list on which David Robinson would not appear).

Wrong. Again. At least depending on how you define the word.

Robinson was known to not enjoy the physical style of Malone, and it was readily obvious when observing their playoff matchups. It bothered him on both ends, and that's one of the reasons Malone dominated him in the playoffs.

In other words, the post. Malone's strength was Robinson's weakness in that matchup.

Game. Set. Match.

Defensively, Malone was a strong post defender capable of muscling his man off his sweet spot, but not a great shotblocker. Robinson was not as physical but made up for it with his much greater reach and timing, one of the great shotblockers of his day both on and off the ball.

I'd say that Malone was one of the best man to man defenders to play -- something he rarely gets credit for -- but couldn't do what a Robinson or Hakeem did as a team defensive presence.

In a one to one scenario, however, I'd take him over Robinson any day. As was vindicated by those playoff matchups: Robinson could not get it going on either end. Because of Malone.

That's the best scouting report I can give you,

I wouldn't quit my day job if I were you, and I never asked for an amateur scouting report in the first place. I'm quite sure that this is nothing new, your having a higher opinion of yourself than those around or in response to you. Rather goes with all the other "ME AM BIZARRO" statements you've been showboating.

Malone had the more dominant post move but Robinson matched him with more variety and size, Robinson was the better post defender.

Wrong again, on both counts or sides of the floor.

Overall, Malone was better in almost every facet offensively and, since this became a man to man assignment for both players on both ends, he also had the advantage defensively.

If you ask me about team defense, I give it to Robinson easily. But that's inverted when it comes to man to man post defense. Malone owned Robinson, and was one of the best in the game.

Unfortunately, the two are often confused or plain conflated falsely.

Offensively, no contest. Malone in a rout on skillsets, and result.

Robinson's lack of post game killed him in that matchup. He wasn't going to get around Malone with his athleticism and his fundamentals were too lacking to make up the difference -- an example of what so often happens in playoff basketball versus that of 3-4 different teams in a week from the regular season.

If you want statistical evidence, use the above link and if you can find a shot location chart for that period (I don't know if they exist in the public domain), you can add that into your analysis.

Since there's no doubt it bears repeating, as you seem to enjoy ignoring the obvious, regular season matchups prove and mean far less because of their inconsistent nature: meaning there's a chance you'll see a guy twice in one week and then not see him for another 3-4 months.

Such matchups thus are often contradictory and full of holes as far as analysis and follow through, whereas the playoffs are a consistent grouping of games that create a result that is selfsame.

And Malone dominated Robinson in that tight, cumulative process of games -- the playoffs -- in multiple years.

We define players through consistency. A major way to gauge them against one another is how they play against each other under the most congruent and competitive circumstance. For the NBA, that's quite clearly the post season. And there's no question that Malone was better than Robinson head to head under such a rubric.

Ignoring that in favor of a less competitive, incongruent environment or non-grouping of games is at its base highly illogical and contradictory to some of your previous postings.

But it's clear that the logistics and specifics don't matter nearly as much as the over-arcing assumption you're blindly running with. Logic be damned.

Oh, and the word "alacrity" probably doesn't mean what you think it does based on your usage.

Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) - Cite This Source - Share This
a