Malone is probably the 2nd best PF of all time and Stockton is probably Top 3 PGs.
yea. as much as i like westbrook and durant, no way. stockton was crazy good...basically as good as nash in passing and shooting, and tenacious defense on top of it. and i don't agree with duncan being the best pf but yea malone is like a PF standard. i was rooting for them to beat the bulls.
The Stockton/Malone duo sets an awfully high bar to surpass. So far, Westy and Durant are on a very similar trajectory, towards the same level.
you think? They don't complement each other very well, that i see. Stockton and malone were extremely complementary players. malone wasn't a ball dominant guy, durant and westbrook both are. Isn't that the problem everyone talks about with them? It's a real confusing situation...there are times where it's hard (as a coach) to figure out who should have the ball. I just don't think they will get anywhere near the kind of 'nother level success that stockton and malone had.
the only curious thing for me is that this new NBA is a little different in that you can succeed with two gaurds like that. Even though durant isn't a guard technically, he really is. Warriors were able to get a ring, so they can too. Still, i'd prefer to have a little bit more complementary players. If i were either of them, I'd consider going to another team with a better fit, if rings were my goal. but they're ok either way.
Stockton and Malone complemented each other. Durant and Westbrook seem to compete for shots on their own teams and are a bit conflicting in that sense. _________________ From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Stockton and Malone complemented each other. Durant and Westbrook seem to compete for shots on their own teams and are a bit conflicting in that sense.
I don't think Russ and KD compliment each other the way Stock/Malone did, but I have never bought the idea that they're competing for the ball or not complimenting each other. Those guys really like each other, and lineups featuring the both of them routinely decimate opponents. It's when they're not on the floor together that OKC falls apart.
Durant and Westbrook, not even close. _________________ "Now, if life is coffee, then the jobs, money & position in society are the cups. They are just tools to hold & contain life, but the quality of life doesn't change. Sometimes, by concentrating only on the cup, we fail to enjoy the coffee in it."
Question: Why do people always rank Garnett over Malone?
I don't know that there's any "always" about it.
Among Laker fans, there's probably a tilt towards Malone in two senses: first, that Karl proved a good teammate here and gave a heroic season for us at a very advanced career stage. Second, Garnett declared he'd never play for a Western states team, so there's probably a resentment about that.
In terms of attitude, I never liked Garnett's petty hard-ass pretense.
But overall to me, if one prefers (or needs or values) a better scorer, Karl's got to be considered the better guy. If one prefers a more mobile, more versatile (three position) defender, KG's probably the more frequent pick.
If I had to choose one over the other for some personal dream team, I'd pick Karl for the reasons mentioned.
After Duncan and Malone, there doesn't seem to be a strong consensus on how to order the next slots. But the guys in the scramble tend to be McHale, KG, Barkley, Dirk, Bob Pettit, and Elvin Hayes.
The Stockton/Malone duo sets an awfully high bar to surpass. So far, Westy and Durant are on a very similar trajectory, towards the same level.
you think? They don't complement each other very well, that i see. Stockton and malone were extremely complementary players. malone wasn't a ball dominant guy, durant and westbrook both are. Isn't that the problem everyone talks about with them? It's a real confusing situation...there are times where it's hard (as a coach) to figure out who should have the ball. I just don't think they will get anywhere near the kind of 'nother level success that stockton and malone had.
the only curious thing for me is that this new NBA is a little different in that you can succeed with two gaurds like that. Even though durant isn't a guard technically, he really is. Warriors were able to get a ring, so they can too. Still, i'd prefer to have a little bit more complementary players. If i were either of them, I'd consider going to another team with a better fit, if rings were my goal. but they're ok either way.
Well, I think Westbrook and Durant are highly complementary as teammates but there are differences when compared to Stockton-Malone. I look at Stockton as the feeder type PG and primarily a reliable counter-puncher as a scorer to Malone. Westbrook is the superior player of his duo, a better defender and better clutch player compared to Durant. Durant is a terrific player but he's overrated in pop media IMO; he's nearly the anti-clutch guy. Westbrook gets the nod IMO as having the tougher PG job, having to feed and score and rebound and defend as well as - if not better than - his partner. I think Durant shrinks from pressure; I don't blame that on his pairing with Westbrook.
Durant is not a guard, but he has good guard skills for a 6'10" man; he's the remake in a sense of Ralph Sampson, who also had good guard skills for a 7'4" man and was not a guard.
The Stockton/Malone duo sets an awfully high bar to surpass. So far, Westy and Durant are on a very similar trajectory, towards the same level.
you think? They don't complement each other very well, that i see. Stockton and malone were extremely complementary players. malone wasn't a ball dominant guy, durant and westbrook both are. Isn't that the problem everyone talks about with them? It's a real confusing situation...there are times where it's hard (as a coach) to figure out who should have the ball. I just don't think they will get anywhere near the kind of 'nother level success that stockton and malone had.
the only curious thing for me is that this new NBA is a little different in that you can succeed with two gaurds like that. Even though durant isn't a guard technically, he really is. Warriors were able to get a ring, so they can too. Still, i'd prefer to have a little bit more complementary players. If i were either of them, I'd consider going to another team with a better fit, if rings were my goal. but they're ok either way.
Well, I think Westbrook and Durant are highly complementary as teammates but there are differences when compared to Stockton-Malone. I look at Stockton as the feeder type PG and primarily a reliable counter-puncher as a scorer to Malone. Westbrook is the superior player of his duo, a better defender and better clutch player compared to Durant. Durant is a terrific player but he's overrated in pop media IMO; he's nearly the anti-clutch guy. Westbrook gets the nod IMO as having the tougher PG job, having to feed and score and rebound and defend as well as - if not better than - his partner. I think Durant shrinks from pressure; I don't blame that on his pairing with Westbrook.
Durant is not a guard, but he has good guard skills for a 6'10" man; he's the remake in a sense of Ralph Sampson, who also had good guard skills for a 7'4" man and was not a guard.
I don't know if I agree about highly complementary...especially compared to Stockton and Malone, which is almost the epitome of complementary players. You don't think you are overrating the durant/westbrook combo there?
The Stockton/Malone duo sets an awfully high bar to surpass. So far, Westy and Durant are on a very similar trajectory, towards the same level.
you think? They don't complement each other very well, that i see. Stockton and malone were extremely complementary players. malone wasn't a ball dominant guy, durant and westbrook both are. Isn't that the problem everyone talks about with them? It's a real confusing situation...there are times where it's hard (as a coach) to figure out who should have the ball. I just don't think they will get anywhere near the kind of 'nother level success that stockton and malone had.
the only curious thing for me is that this new NBA is a little different in that you can succeed with two gaurds like that. Even though durant isn't a guard technically, he really is. Warriors were able to get a ring, so they can too. Still, i'd prefer to have a little bit more complementary players. If i were either of them, I'd consider going to another team with a better fit, if rings were my goal. but they're ok either way.
Well, I think Westbrook and Durant are highly complementary as teammates but there are differences when compared to Stockton-Malone. I look at Stockton as the feeder type PG and primarily a reliable counter-puncher as a scorer to Malone. Westbrook is the superior player of his duo, a better defender and better clutch player compared to Durant. Durant is a terrific player but he's overrated in pop media IMO; he's nearly the anti-clutch guy. Westbrook gets the nod IMO as having the tougher PG job, having to feed and score and rebound and defend as well as - if not better than - his partner. I think Durant shrinks from pressure; I don't blame that on his pairing with Westbrook.
Durant is not a guard, but he has good guard skills for a 6'10" man; he's the remake in a sense of Ralph Sampson, who also had good guard skills for a 7'4" man and was not a guard.
I don't know if I agree about highly complementary...especially compared to Stockton and Malone, which is almost the epitome of complementary players. You don't think you are overrating the durant/westbrook combo there?
No. I'd take Westbrook over Stockton in combination with any other player.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
but yea malone is like a PF standard. i was rooting for them to beat the bulls.
