Is Karl Malone massively overrated ?

[bastillon]

1.Stockton seems to be far more impactful player than Malone according to plus minus stats. particularly defensively Malone seems far worse than people thought.
2.you have a volume scoring big whose efficiency drops significantly in the PS and who doesn't really bring you all that much outside of scoring. he's a good rebounder and became a really good passer later in his career but that can only be used as a tiebreaker, not his primary qualities.
3.his defense is largely appreciated because he could lock down a star like Duncan in his prime (Duncan's last 4 games in 04 are pathetic offensively, defended man2man) but his impact defensively is far less than what you would expect so maybe he couldn't play at the same intensity when he was volume scoring offensively ?

Is Karl Malone massively overrated ? I'm thinkin #25 all-time or so. why is his impact in MVP years (97-99) just weak ? why does Stockton look so much better than Malone in +/- stats ? why did the Jazz perform so poorly despite combining supposed top3 PF and top5 PG on the same team ?

[HeartBreakKid]

1.Stockton seems to be far more impactful player than Malone according to plus minus stats. particularly defensively Malone seems far worse than people thought.
2.you have a volume scoring big whose efficiency drops significantly in the PS and who doesn't really bring you all that much outside of scoring. he's a good rebounder and became a really good passer later in his career but that can only be used as a tiebreaker, not his primary qualities.
3.his defense is largely appreciated because he could lock down a star like Duncan in his prime (Duncan's last 4 games in 04 are pathetic offensively, defended man2man) but his impact defensively is far less than what you would expect so maybe he couldn't play at the same intensity when he was volume scoring offensively ?

Is Karl Malone massively overrated ? I'm thinkin #25 all-time or so. why is his impact in MVP years (97-99) just weak ? why does Stockton look so much better than Malone in +/- stats ? why did the Jazz perform so poorly despite combining supposed top3 PF and top5 PG on the same team ?

Stockton wasn't that great, minus plus stats or not, Stockton didn't really help with the scoring load, which at times the Jazz needed. Most all time great stars had another star player who could take over if they were having an off night (and in the case of Malone, he was not a great playoff player, so he def needed that).

Aside from that, around the period where Malone was getting MVP stuff his team had almost won the championship on two occasions. He's had a pretty good career I'd say. I've never really heard anyone say anything about Malone's defense being amazing, if anything it gets bashed too much since people are spoiled by Duncan and Garnett's ability on that end.

[The Infamous1]

First off Karl was always better then stockton. They lost series in the 90's particularly because stockton got owned by Opposing PG's and couldn't step up as a secondary scorer to help him out. You've actually made a thread about this

But in general i do think Karl is overrated as a scorer because people just look at his raw PPG totals and not ability. Karl got more easy baskets then any player I've ever seen, ive also read many times how a large percentage of his baskets were assisted by John. He was an excellent finisher in that system But when it was time to make the basket he often struggled because he has no real go to move. The easy baskets are hard to come by in those moments when defenses tighten up.

Ill take guys like Dirk/Barkley/Duncan/And Mchale over Karl as scorers(and offensive players in general) because i trust them more to get their own shot in the playoffs more then Karl.

[ardee]

I think he's a little underrated if and only if you judge him on the same standards as KG.

The plus-minus numbers you have are basically only reliable from '01 onward (not too sure what the '97-'00 stats on NBA.com include), which is well past both of their primes, so it's hardly fair to use that.

He was primarily a scorer, yes, but what a scorer. He essentially gave you 25-10 for 11 years in a row. Couple that with well above average defense, and there's a player who is absolutely capable of being the best player on a title team. Of course, he's going to need support, which he rarely had. Stockton is a great playmaker but not a true secondary scorer as such.

I feel his Playoff efficiency problems are overblown, the same thing happened to KG and people still love him. Here's a post I remember ElGee making in the Top 100 project:

Karl Malone's Great Games

I think the focusing on all the negatives, with all players, does a great disservice to their positives. As I've said, it's better to have a guy with 10 amazing seasons and 5 horrible ones than a guy with 5 amazing seasons and 0 horrible ones.

People really need to consider how much this Losing Bias plays tricks on their brains. The lasting memory of Malone being stripped, or missing 2 FT's in the opening Finals game (on the heels of one or two questionable outs in the past) smacks of availibility heuristic (error). The brain will over-emphasize that easily accessible information in analysis. It happens to all players who lose, and the opposite happens to players who win.

I find it ironic that so many people who like to look at team roster don't consider just how much Malone did for the Jazz. He's quite similar to Dirk Nowitzki and this year's Dallas team ITO structure. Stockton by the late 90s has a reduced role of efficiency, and not much more (like Kidd). The team has a few shooters, a smart coach, a decent bench (Utah never had a Tyson Chandler) and it all revolves around Malone.

Anyway, in focusing on the positive and what people may have forgotten (or never known), here are Malone's greatest games from his prime:

1988
G2 LA – Malone scores 18 of his 29 in second half to “stun” LA at the Forum.
G6 LA – He predicts a G7 and delivers with 27-11 (58.5% TS)
G7 LA – In defeat again back-to-back champs, 31 points 15 rebounds (62.1% TS)

1989
G2 GSW – Malone, scoreless in the 1st of G1 (16 in 2nd half) came out blazing, with 14 in first and 24 at half. He finished with 37 points (13-25, 11-14) and 22 rebounds, but the rest of the jazz were 18-54 (33%). I just don't see the evidence his team was very good in these years (Malone had 33-14 in G3).

1990
G4 Pho After going just 23-62 in the first 3 games, Malone helps force game 5 with 33 points (13-24, 7-9) and 11 rebounds. (Note, in Game 5, Malone tied the score with a 20-footer in the final seconds of the game, but KJ hit a buzzer beater to win. Malone 26-9 (10-19, 6-12) in that game, Stockton just 3-11)

1991
G5 Pho – Malone scores 11 of his 38 points in the 4th quarter to close out the Suns.
G2 Por – After a subpar G1, Malone goes for 40 in G2 defeat. He sparks a 23-point deficit, 45-point fourth quarter with 20 4th-quarter points of his own (31 in 2nd half). They lose on a Terry Porter buzzer beater. Malone made 2 Fts with 41 seconds left ot cut it 116-112, then forced a jump on Ainge on inbounds. Utah won it, Jeff Malone hit to make it 116-114, then Karl tied it with FT's at 116-116.

1992
G4 v LAC Malone with 44 and 11 but rest of Jazz combine for 23-55 (41.8%) and Clips shoot 50% to win.
G5 v Sea – To closeout Sonics, Malone scores 15 of his 37 in 4th, erasing an 8 point hole.
G3 v Por – Down 2-0 and back home, Malone goes for an absolute gem: 39-7-7 (68% TS)
G5 v Por – In the pivotal game of the series, with Stockton injured and out most of game, Malone carries the Jazz into OT with 38 points. This game was on classic recently and I've referenced, but it's a hugely steady diet of Karl on offense for Utah. Malone had 28 of 38 in 2nd half. He had 14 rebounds.

1994
G4 v Spurs – He closes out San Antonio with 34 and 12 (60% TS) and the key 20-footer with 42 seconds left to put Utah up 91-88.
G7 v Den – Malone with 31 and 14 on 12-23. “Karl took over” Hornacek said afterwards.

1995
G3 Hou – After Houston evened the series, Malone dropped 32-19-5 in Hou, with 21 in the second half. Malone had 11 in the third to spark the game's key run, according to AP report.

1996
G5 Por – Utah just destroyed Portland, and Malone had 21-10 in only 31 minutes. His counterparts, Buck Williams and Harvey Grant, shot a combined 3-14 for Portland.
G5+6 Sea Facing elimination, Malone with two huge games (30.5 ppg 12.5 rap 4.5 apg)

1997
G4 LAL – Ahead 2-1, Malone just crushes lakers as he rebounds from a 2-20 game: 42 points, 9 rebounds.
G5 LAL – He finishes LA with a 32 point 20 rebound performance in G5 at home. Btw, you barely notice Shaquille O'Neal is playing for the Lakers when you watch the 4th Q and OT of that game, until a dunk at ~3 min. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N_4i2ZZsUbk&NR=1) Malone with a jumper at 3:20 of OT after 2 FT's, then a fade with 90 seconds left over Campbell to make it 96-93, the final FG.
G3 Chi – Down 2-0, Malone responds with 37 poits an 10 boards (55% TS) back in Utah.

1998
G5 Hou – This time – perhaps because Hakeem is older? – Malone bests Houston with 31-15-5 virtuoso game.
G4 SAS – Again, up 2-1 Malone goes for 34-12-4 (17-28) in a game 4 after a bad G3 (6-21 shooting), this against the Spurs twin towers and top-rated defense. Avery Johnson described the game afterwards simply as, “Karl Malone.” Robinson said “Malone was as good as he could be shooting the ball.”
G5 Chi – Basically single-handedly carries Utah back home with 17-27 39-9-5 game, and was easily the best player on court that day. He hit the dagger shot in the final minute to secure an 80-76 lead. Jordan misses at buzzer. (Final 6 here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u-E9rmJPh5U&NR=1

In the Final 6 minutes: Malone is doubled which leads to a breakdown, and ultimately a Carr layup. On the next trip he is doubled and hits Carr for open J. Then Malone with a scoop over Rodman. At 2:00 left, another double leads to a hockey assist on another Carr J. Then the dagger over Rodman, and Costas says “Malone is personally pushing the series back to Utah.”

G6 v Chi – Has 31-11-7 and does seemingly everything, except infamously hold on to the ball on his final touch.

(Interesting note about the last 2 games– Malone with 70 of Utah's 149 points in final 2 games (47%!) on 65.4% TS 28-46, 14-17. Jordan with 73 of Chicago's 148 points (49%) on 24-61, 22-26 on 50.4% TS)

I think it's unfair to forget Malone's dominant moments in favor of a few failures and not do the same for KG. If you want to mark them both down, go ahead, but there's major inconsistency in the act of propping KG and dropping Malone when, even though I'm relatively more a Garnett backer, one of them has clearly come through more in the Playoffs than the other.

I think the only comparable KG games are:

2002 G2 vs Mavs: 31/18/5/2/3, gets burned by Dirk though.
2003 G2 vs Lakers: 35/20/7, 15/21 shooting. One of the best Playoff performances of the decade.
2004 G3 vs SacTown: 30/15/3/3/5. Absolutely epic. Was everywhere in that game.
2004 G7 vs SacTown: 32/21/2/4/5. Everyone knows this one.
2008 G4 vs Cleveland: 26/16/4/2/3.
2008 G6 vs LA: 26/14/4/3.
2012 G3 and G4 vs Hawks: 28/15/2/3/5 and 29/11 on 12/20.

So while KG does have some great Playoff performances, it's fair to say his Playoff resume is shorter than Malone's. Now it's not KG's fault his cast sucked so bad he couldn't make it more, but it's not Malone's fault that he made use of the opportunities that came his way either.

My point is, I know you rank KG in your top 10. He was definitely a better regular season performer than Malone, at least in my book. Point is, is the regular season gap so large that it can overcome the Playoff advantage Malone has? One title run IMO is not enough to bridge the litany of performances... And 2008 KG IMO wasn't even as good in the POs as '98 Malone.

[Dr Pepper]

1.Stockton seems to be far more impactful player than Malone according to plus minus stats. particularly defensively Malone seems far worse than people thought.
2.you have a volume scoring big whose efficiency drops significantly in the PS and who doesn't really bring you all that much outside of scoring. he's a good rebounder and became a really good passer later in his career but that can only be used as a tiebreaker, not his primary qualities.
3.his defense is largely appreciated because he could lock down a star like Duncan in his prime (Duncan's last 4 games in 04 are pathetic offensively, defended man2man) but his impact defensively is far less than what you would expect so maybe he couldn't play at the same intensity when he was volume scoring offensively ?

Is Karl Malone massively overrated ? I'm thinkin #25 all-time or so. why is his impact in MVP years (97-99) just weak ? why does Stockton look so much better than Malone in +/- stats ? why did the Jazz perform so poorly despite combining supposed top3 PF and top5 PG on the same team ?

1. Relying on one stat or variant thereof, even the hailed Plus Minus stats, leaves a lot to be desired (like any stat), especially with older players where the data also leaves a lot to be desired. Dirk won the game vs the Bulls the other day and finished -2 for example. See Matt Bonner being a +/- King for another. Why not use a blend or more stats instead? Sort of like looking at KG's Minnesota years and scratching your head why his teams weren't good/great defensively in DRTG even though KG is hailed as a dominant defender

2. Brings good man to man defense and physicality too

3. Wouldn't be a bastillon thread without some kind of shot against Duncan I see you read Simmons book or the excerpt, I remember typing it out a while back too.

I think Karl Malone has the strongest case for being the 2nd best PF but offensively he' doesn't touch Dirk's level and defensively he's not a true anchor like Duncan or as versatile as KG, but he's probably the best mix when you consider Karl's outstanding longevity/accolades. Also for what it's worth when it comes to RealGM, the PF and PG rankings are more controversial than not including even some mods proclaiming Duncan to be a career center and the like.

You can argue Malone is overrated but his combination of accolades, longevity, and impact ranks him right with the best PF's all time and has a solid case for being a top 20 GOAT. And imo if you start saying Karl is overrated it can trickle down to other HOF PF's and their rankings as well. Malone's offense wasn't as great as his regular season numbers showed but the Jazz could have had more quality depth too. Fans underrate just how much of a physical specimen Karl was, that in itself brought a lot of matchup advantages

[bastillon]

The plus-minus numbers you have are basically only reliable from '01 onward (not too sure what the '97-'00 stats on NBA.com include), which is well past both of their primes, so it's hardly fair to use that.

can you explain why ?

[ardee]

The plus-minus numbers you have are basically only reliable from '01 onward (not too sure what the '97-'00 stats on NBA.com include), which is well past both of their primes, so it's hardly fair to use that.

can you explain why ?

Seriously? How can you use any kind of post-prime numbers for any player to judge them over the course of their careers?

[colts18]

Seriously? How can you use any kind of post-prime numbers for any player to judge them over the course of their careers?

How can you call it post prime when Malone won his 2 MVP's and finished 2nd place in MVP voting?

[ardee]

Seriously? How can you use any kind of post-prime numbers for any player to judge them over the course of their careers?

How can you call it post prime when Malone won his 2 MVP's and finished 2nd place in MVP voting?

I'm talking about 2001 onward. I don't know how good the '97-'00 data is.

[An Unbiased Fan]

I swear the PC Board is bi-polar.

If we're discussing Stockton....well he's overrated because he played with Malone. But when talking about Malone he's overrated because of Stock's +/- numbers. Brilliant.

[HeartBreakKid]

I swear the PC Board is bi-polar.

If we're discussing Stockton....well he's overrated because he played with Malone. But when talking about Malone he's overrated because of Stock's +/- numbers. Brilliant.

I know right, different people have different opinions. Totally crazy.

[Rust In Peace]

you have a volume scoring big whose efficiency drops significantly in the PS and who doesn't really bring you all that much outside of scoring. he's a good rebounder and became a really good passer later in his career but that can only be used as a tiebreaker, not his primary qualities.

Hilarious to see a Garnett fan knock Malone for a lack of post-season success.

[WhatRickyThinks]

One thing I'll say is that in each of Jordan's legacy cementing finals shots against Utah, Malone's idiocy precedes them. Two missed free throws in the Game 1 in 97 precede Jordan's game-winner. An ill-advised perimeter shot precedes Jordan's flu game three. And of course losing the ball to Jordan in game 6. Id imagine Malone had a pathetic basketball IQ on games that had less viewership as well.

[Dr Positivity]

Only a little. Getting voted above KG, Oscar and West in the last RGM top 100 was too much. If placed below those 3 and LBJ (15-20) I don't have a problem with how Karl is ranked

[bastillon]

One thing I'll say is that in each of Jordan's legacy cementing finals shots against Utah, Malone's idiocy precedes them. Two missed free throws in the Game 1 in 97 precede Jordan's game-winner. An ill-advised perimeter shot precedes Jordan's flu game three. And of course losing the ball to Jordan in game 6. Id imagine Malone had a pathetic basketball IQ on games that had less viewership as well.

that was actually Stockton's fault. his entry pass was too early, he should've waited for Jordan to go around. Malone was blind-sided and couldn't know Jordan's there. Stockton should've known better than to make an early entry pass with Jordan around.

Hilarious to see a Garnett fan knock Malone for a lack of post-season success.

if you're talking about scoring efficiency then obviously it's a knock on KG. but unlike for Malone it wasn't his primary asset. team defense, passing, rebounding, spacing - all that stayed the same. Garnett can contribute in so many ways that scoring drop off doesn't really hurt him that much. when scoring is really all you can do at a really dominant level and that goes down as well, then it becomes a real problem because you don't have other areas where you can make up for your dropoff. not nearly the same problem for KG as he could make up for it elsewhere. Garnett's scoring volume and efficiency is indeed unimpressive for a guy his caliber... but his impact was insane. you can look it up.

If we're discussing Stockton....well he's overrated because he played with Malone. But when talking about Malone he's overrated because of Stock's +/- numbers. Brilliant.

no. more like both of them are overrated. top3 PF and top5 PG together should've been winning 60+ and making the finals every year. but really they were closer to GP & Kemp in terms of team achievements. imagine Drexler playing his whole career next to Hakeem. the results Stock and Malone achieved together are just so drastically different from what they should've been that someone has to take responsbility.

to me Stockton's overrated bc of PS. he was outplayed way too many times. what KJ, Porter and GP did to him isn't really brought up but if people knew it, they'd have changed their minds about Stockton. he's a phenomenal RS performer but when defenses were set and he had to create something out of nothing, he struggled.

Malone's overrated for different reasons that we're discussing right now.

I'm talking about 2001 onward. I don't know how good the '97-'00 data is.

obviously I was talking about 97-00 data. there's no reason to dismiss it. so Malone is nowhere near where you thought he'd be. what do you make of it ? do you just ignore it because it doesn't suit well with your opinion on him ? or do you come to some conclusion that you might've actually overrated him ? to me it speaks volumes that Stockton is actually looking like a star of that team and not Malone. it's mind boggling actually because it goes against what people at the time thought of their dynamics, it goes against established opinion of this board and really it's against common sense as well. but that doesn't mean we should ever dismiss valuable information. Stockton seems to be the cathalyst of that team, not Malone, and it makes me wonder so I made this thread.

your response is unacceptable for a legit debate. we're here to give answers to the multitude of questions that pop up immediately, not avoid answering these questions by dismissing important data.

[tsherkin]

Is Malone overrated?

Well, that raises the question of where he's rated to begin with, no?

I think that a lot of people are starting to question his position relative to Dirk, Barkley, Duncan and even Garnett.

He was always an impressive offensive player and a solid man defensive player who played well within the team concept but wasn't a defensive anchor because he was never a dominant help defender. He was the ultimate hard-work guy and he evidenced a massive amount of skill development throughout his career (most clearly seen in his FT shooting and jumper, of course, but also as a passer, screen-and-roll baller, etc). He struggled with iso post sometimes and he wasn't an ultra-athlete in the run/jump sense, though obviously he had excellent end-to-end speed and fantastic power.

I think that it's fairer to say that guys are starting to catch up to Malone more so than he is "massively overrated." He was a very good player and he ranks well stacked up against his peers at the 4. Exactly where, well, that is another matter, but I don't think it's fair or accurate to call him "massively overrated," especially on the merits of a stat like APM (or RAPM, etc, etc), since there are still plenty of issues with those representations and I've never had faith in single-number metrics for basketball players as anything but guides for the next direction of analytical process.

[bastillon]

I never implied he was actually massively overrated. I asked the question. in fact, I don't even know what to believe in anymore, but what concerns me is Stockton looking like he's far more impactful than Malone and this is something that makes Malone massively overrated. the idea that Stockton could be #1 of that team and Malone actually failed to make high impact is completely contrary to what people at the time thought, to the conclusions we came to after years of Stockton/Malone debates, to any boxscore metric etc. I can see I'm not the only one who's confused because posters I expected to be active in this thread haven't showed up and they're probably confused too. it's just hard to explain these results.

[tsherkin]

I never implied he was actually massively overrated. I asked the question.

Semantic debate, not super-salient to the thread itself but because I can't help myself...

Spoiler:

The title itself implies the possibility. If you wanted a discussion that didn't imply that, you'd have used a different title. Let's not beat around the bush here, shall we? You could have easily just said "overrated," but clearly used the adverb "massively" for a reason. I'm not saying you have an anti-Malone agenda, but that word factored in for a reason and you clearly implied the possibility.

in fact, I don't even know what to believe in anymore, but what concerns me is Stockton looking like he's far more impactful than Malone and this is something that makes Malone massively overrated.

I question that premise, though, because something not discussed that often is how generally trashy Utah was outside of those two players, so Stockton's absence from the starting lineup meant that a lot of the time, Malone was playing with crap. Take the title runs, for example. In 97, when Stockton went to the bench, that generally left Malone playing with Hornacek (who played 4 or 5 fewer MPG than Stockton), Bryon Russell, Greg Ostertag and Shandon Anderson or Howard Eisley. That's not exactly a stunning squad. Hornacek was good, sure, but he was unathletic, had a bum knee besides and really wasn't good at initiating offense at that stage of his career (he was 33 on top of all of that). He worked well as a system player, but he certainly wasn't a truly gifted upper-tier playmaker, just a very good one.

Meantime, the Jazz never had anyone else who could really carry the offense BESIDES Malone in terms of actually finishing plays. I think the premise that Stockton was that high-impact sort of ignores some of the contextual factors of the roster. He regularly proved himself unwilling and/or incapable of volume shooting to any serious level, certainly not capable of consistently scoring at the volumes necessary to float an offense without finishers. He was an efficient scorer, a HIGHLY efficient scorer, but he came up short in the playoffs on a fairly regular basis as well. Without Malone in the lineup, who was going to drive the volume of the Utah offense? Would they have really continued on and scored at comparable efficiency without someone of equivalent talent to the Mailman replacing him? And who besides Barkley could do that? Do we want to try and assert that Kemp would have done what Malone did, when no other PF has done what Karl did in the last 30 years or so? Even Barkley peaked at 28.3 ppg and only had two seasons over 25.8 ppg. Malone had 9, all but one at 27+ ppg and three straight 29+ ppg seasons. Barkley was an efficient monster, but his style of play wasn't as conducive to the Utah offense as was Malone's.

Anyway, that's an arbitrary thought construct, so it has limited value, but I think you see my point. +/- does wonders for Stockton's rep, sure, but I don't know that it really assassinates Malone's value because there are some basic truths of that team that kind of get ignored.

Consider for a moment that the Jazz's really big offensive leap didn't actually occur when Stockton became a starter, a year in which he rocketed up to 14.7 ppg and a league-leading 13.8 apg after managing 7.9 and 8.2 the year before. They moved from 104.1 ORTG as a team to 106.8. It was an increase, sure, but it wasn't a huge one and it dove-tailed with Malone improving in his third season... but his FG% only rose 0.8%. He did play about 4 more minutes per game, though, and he increased from 59.8% FT to 70% (and a year after, to 76.6%). So right away, there wasn't a ton of really obvious supernal influence on behalf of Stockton and this was during the third-highest APG output of his entire career, mind. So that's 88.

The year after, 106.6 ORTG. Stockton still producing over 13 apg, manages one of the three straight 17+ ppg seasons of his career (1.2+ ppg higher than any other season of his career apart from 89, 90 and 91) and the ORTG is still basically the same.

It's not actually until Sloan took over full-time in 1990 that the Jazz leapt up to 110.3 ORTG, and wouldn't dip under 108 ORTG again until the 99 lockout season, peaking as high as 114.3 once they acquired Hornacek and running at 112.7+ from 95 through 98.

the idea that Stockton could be #1 of that team and Malone actually failed to make high impact is completely contrary to what people at the time thought, to the conclusions we came to after years of Stockton/Malone debates, to any boxscore metric etc. I can see I'm not the only one who's confused because posters I expected to be active in this thread haven't showed up and they're probably confused too. it's just hard to explain these results.

An interesting thought, but it seems counter-intuitive when you consider the ramifications of Stockton's playoff performances. The 97 Finals come to mind, since it was incapable of providing the SECONDARY scoring punch necessary to drive the team to victory. He was, of course, 34 years old or thereabouts, so some slack should be given, but he was always a guy who used shot selection as a big part of his efficiency and of course his scoring volume was only ever above 15.8 ppg for three years, all of which were at paces comparable to the Nash-led Suns of the mid-2000s. Let's not forget as well that he saw a 4% drop in his TS% come the playoffs and a 5-point drop in his ORTG. It's not like he handled those situations especially well, those are not small decreases. Playoff decrease is an accepted and common part of the NBA experience, those players who see maintenance or (in rarer cases) INCREASES are generally thought to be extremely elite performers, but a drop that size?

That doesn't really square with the idea that he could have shouldered a team on his own, not when you do ultimately need to finish the play. One of the biggest arguments Nash supporters have over Stockton is that Steve was generally a superior playoff scorer who could summon a reasonably large game as required. For comparison's sake, too, Nash saw -2.1% TS and -2 ORTG, roughly half the decline that Stockton saw from RS -> PS.

Limited analysis for a player-player comparison, but another data point in a discussion of an idea that +/- advances that seems not to square with anecdotal evidence or be supported by other numbers, or even basic correlation with the largest part of Utah's increase in efficacy. Obviously, Stockton's talent was a large part of their success, but the idea that he was capable of a lot more or that his presence overrates Malone is kind of mystifying to me even still.

[jman2585]

You basically need to think he was worse than Stockton (and thus massively overrated) to justify the retrospective "Stockton was a superstar" narrative. I don't agree with that, I think he was clearly better and is a top 15 type player, and don't care about some advanced stats that are often plainly wrong.

[Gideon]

I think Malone is pretty overrated (not sure about "massively" but I guess that depends on how you look at it). I feel like Malone is a top-30 all-time guy, but not top-20. I think Stockton belongs in the same general category, but I rank him slightly ahead of Malone.

I don't think it goes against common sense to rank Stockton ahead of Malone, and some people did think it at the time. When you listen to John Wooden or Jack Ramsey talk about their admiration for Stockton, they clearly felt he was vastly underrated and incredibly valuable. They're not going to come out and directly compare him to Malone and rank the two of them (which probably wasn't asked of them, and would be in sort-of poor taste anyway), but the implication of preferring Stockton seems to be there in some of what they've said. Some other people felt this way at the time, too... this was obviously a minority opinion, but it's not like it was unheard of either. Isiah Thomas also made it very clear that he ranked Stockton over Malone, while speaking at halftime of a broadcast a few weeks ago.

Malone was not a very high-IQ player and he made some very unfortunate mistakes in key moments. Even more importantly, his performance dropped off more in the playoffs than perhaps any other major star ever. His TS% dropped almost 6%, going from very efficient in RS to poor in the PS. His Ortg was much worse in PS than in RS... and his REB% and AST% were lower, but his usage was higher. In 1996 and 1997 respectively, Malone had usage rates of 35% and 33%, but only had a TS% of .498 and .501 ... in other words, he had the ball in his hands constantly and was horribly inefficient.

Stockton did have some bad series in the playoffs and especially had trouble with athletic physical guards (like Harper or KJ), but his overall playoff performance was still pretty good (.568 TS%, over .200 ws/48 seven times, over 120 Ortg eight times, led playoffs in AST% nine times, and STL% twice... also had some great individual games and series, and multiple big clutch moments).