was reading someone else's comment about Duncan being a greater PF than Karl Malone, mostly based on the fact that they're both amazing but Malone has no championships. thing is that in the 90's the Bulls had a dynasty. so an interesting question is actually "could today's Spurs beat the Jordan/Pippen/Phil Jackson Bulls for a championship?" if yes, why. if no, then I think it's fair to say that Malone isn't less than Duncan based off championships.
2007-05-20 14:15:29 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Sports ➔ Basketball
Could Duncan's Spurs have beaten Jordan's Bulls? Maybe... likely not. But one could make the argument that Duncan's championship teams were inferior to the teams fielded by both the Bulls and the Jazz. Yet he has led three teams, composed of a different core group each time, to a championship. Malone on the other hand was not even the leader on his team, that was Stockton. So based on leadership alone Duncan is better.
Between the players individually, the difference I think is Duncan dominates on both sides of the floor. Malone's career scoring average is higher but he had the advantage of getting set up by Stockton. Duncan is often the hub of the Spurs offense so he has to decide whether to score or set up a teamate. On D, Malone was a good and smart defender but he was in no way the as dominant as Duncan, who anchors what has been the best defense in the league for years.
Lastly compare their regular season and playoff stats, except for rebounds, Malone's averages drop in the post season. Duncan on the other hand, gets better.
That means Duncan is better when it counts.
2007-05-20 15:48:50 · answer #1 · answered by kyle d 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Malone was a great player but he was way overrated. He wasn't that great in the clutch either, I remember those playoff games where he would miss crucial free throws. The only reason why he was so good was because of John Stockton, maybe the best passer in the history of the NBA. Without Stockton, Malone would have been just an above average player.
And the Chicago Bulls of the 90s, the Spurs would not have beaten them. You got Jordan, Pippen, Rodman, Kukoc, Kerr, Longley, Jackson....that team had too much talent and depth.
2007-05-20 15:52:18 · answer #2 · answered by Kevin H 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
tim duncan is a great PF but karl malone is a legend although the arguement that duncan doesnt have a legend point guard like stockton (no offense parker) to help him is a valid one i think malone is better b/c malone played when there where big men now duncan is facing all these short guys in the paint plus malone played til he was like 42 years old and as for the bulls spurs matchup chicago would still have won all their championships and san antonio wouldnt be a contender
2007-05-20 14:28:03 · answer #3 · answered by basketballguru15 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Championships equals better... so Duncan is better.
Plus Malone played with Stockton, one of the best team players ever. T Parker is good but he ain't a traditional point guard and doesn't really give Duncan easy buckets.
They just pass it to Duncan and he does it all himself. No easy layups or dunks off the pick and roll etc.
If ever the spurs need a basket, they just dump it into Duncan and he scores (in the playoffs).
The spurs could win against the bulls because of there defence which is better than that of the Jazz.
2007-05-20 14:21:13 · answer #4 · answered by Shezdogg 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Malone was in the championships, so that is a kind of validation. and no i don't think that the Spurs could have beat Jordan and his team. Plus Duncan has Parker and Ginobili, and Malone only had Stockton. and even though Stockton is my favorite, jordan would blow them all up.
2007-05-20 14:42:52 · answer #5 · answered by poserface 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Tim Duncan- 3 championships
Karl Malone- 0 championships
Malone was the better individual player, Duncan makes his team better.
2007-05-20 14:45:54 · answer #6 · answered by Master Pain 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
duncan doesnt kick people in the air or knee them to get rebounds. duncan doesnt tag along with another team filled with stars to win. duncan doesnt have(no offense tony) one of the greatest point guards of all time.duncan takes care of the ball. remember jordan stole the ball from the old man in the finals ? so whos better? nevermind the rings(ehhm 3 going for four)
2007-05-20 18:03:49 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
duncan hands down. he has done everything a player can do to win a title. malone didnt. duncan is a far better defender as well
2007-05-20 14:42:18 · answer #8 · answered by SINZ 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
nobody can stop duncan! he always gets his points!
2007-05-20 14:38:16 · answer #9 · answered by Dre' #24 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋