Garnett vs Malone vs Barkley (Who's the second best PF of all time)

[Calabis]

Barlkley could take over games offensively in ways that Garnett never could. Barkley's edge offensively is just as good as KG's edge defensively. They both can take over at those ends of the floor in ways the other guy couldn't.

I agree, more versatile also...Chuck played SF at times too. Garnett had a hard time with a 40 year old/injured Karl Malone.

As far as best PF, Duncan or Malone can't go wrong either way imo

[Calabis]

Karl Malone was a numbers machine that choked in the playoffs. Problem with him is that he always played with Stockton, so we don't know how much of his stats are inflated from playing with one of the best PGs of all time. We have seen Barkley and Garnett carry teams without much help.

Garnett hasn't choked in the playoffs??? Dude didn't win anything until he got with Pierce/Allen and a great supporting cast, so I don't know why you use Stockton as a negative against Malone. Malone better than Garnett...shouldn't even be a debate

[Yung D-Will]

Neither of them won anything in their primes so I'm not sure where you guys are going with this

[ImmortalD24]

(assuming Duncan is a PF, which he clearly isn't but i'll play along) KG hands down.

[rmt]

Each one has qualities in his favor:

Malone - longevity, numbers - but a lot of his scoring was benefitted by playing alongside the all-time assist leader, Stockton and Malone choked in the playoffs.

Garnett - best defense of the 3 but can he carry a team in the playoffs? Check out Rasho's opinion below:

Reporters question:

You played alongside the best two PFs of the last 15 years Tim Duncan and Kevin Garnett who both won an MVP award and a championship ring. Who made a bigger impression on you?

Rasho:

I have to say Duncan. He is a true team leader. Garnett is a phenomenal player with great physical abilities but I don't think he is mentally strong enough to be a team leader. If he would have stayed in Minessota I don't think he would ever win a ring. He did the right move by going to Boston because there is Paul Pierce who is a true team leader that scores in clutch moments.


Link(in Slovenian): http://www.rtvslo.si/sport/kosarka/r...entance/231773

Barkley - defense wasn't great but not a choker and can carry a team in the playoffs.

To me that's why Duncan is the clear cut greatest power forward ever - had the offense, defense, could carry a team (especially in the playoffs) and "clutchness," all of which resulted in 4 titles.

[Calabis]

Each one has qualities in his favor:

Malone - longevity, numbers - but a lot of his scoring was benefitted by playing alongside the all-time assist leader, Stockton and Malone choked in the playoffs.

Garnett - best defense of the 3 but can he carry a team in the playoffs? Check out Rasho's opinion below:

Reporters question:

You played alongside the best two PFs of the last 15 years Tim Duncan and Kevin Garnett who both won an MVP award and a championship ring. Who made a bigger impression on you?

Rasho:

I have to say Duncan. He is a true team leader. Garnett is a phenomenal player with great physical abilities but I don't think he is mentally strong enough to be a team leader. If he would have stayed in Minessota I don't think he would ever win a ring. He did the right move by going to Boston because there is Paul Pierce who is a true team leader that scores in clutch moments.


Link(in Slovenian): http://www.rtvslo.si/sport/kosarka/r...entance/231773

Barkley - defense wasn't great but not a choker and can carry a team in the playoffs.

To me that's why Duncan is the clear cut greatest power forward ever - had the offense, defense, could carry a team (especially in the playoffs) and "clutchness," all of which resulted in 4 titles.

Can't argue with that...nice post

[cavsfanatic]

Karl Malone and it isn't even close.

Exactly. It's so far its not even funny. wtf this board on?

[Yung D-Will]

Exactly. It's so far its not even funny. wtf this board on?

The internet

[Andrei89]

And since when was Rodman a PF, guy also played the SF position

[AirJordan23]

1. Charles Barkley. His offensive game was excellent. Better than someone like Duncan's but his defense is what puts him behind him. Sir Charles was lazy and didn't put effort at all times. He'd gamble on the defensive end and often didn't get back in time in transition. He had all the defensive tools to be a monster on the defensive end but he lacked the mindset. And at times he was too aggresive, gambled and it didn't pay off for him. Also, would end up taking a break and not getting back in transition. On the other hand, his offensive game MORE THAN MADE UP for his poor defense. The way this guy would dominate games by scoring and rebounding would leave the casual fan astonished. He was out there getting a near triple double in the WCF, 44/24 in the '93 game 7, dropping 56 on a Warrior team with a rookie CWebb and Gatling, manhandling Buck Williams and Robinson in the '95 playoffs and made a great comeback in the '99 Laker/Rockets playoff series. Also, injuries shortened his career. Barkley himself said he planned on retiring after the '94 or '95 season due to back and knee injuries. Even said he wasn't a "good player' by 1997/98. He had no flaws in his offensive game save for settling for too many 3s.

2. Karl Malone. Never liked him. Felt he didn't deserve either of his MVPs. Should've gone to MJ and Zo. But, I can't deny his superb conditioning, longevity and a bunch of accolades. That's pretty much what puts him above KG but there's no way I'm taking this choke-artist over Garnett when it comes to building a team. Regarding his game, it was overrated. He wasn't as good of a defensive player as listed. Off the top of my head, he was listed as all defensive first team in '98 but was he really better than Duncan or Rodman that year? Doubt it. He was good at stripping the ball, had quick hands and good instincts but not a game changer defensively. Not much of a shot blocker either. His mid range game was excellent in the mid 90s and he was a great scorer. Top 5 in the league for several years. Wasn't clutch though which is the biggest knock on him. He'd fade away when the big moment came. Stockton was the one making big plays. Take a look at the '97 and '98 finals. Pretty much game 3 of the '97 finals and game 5 of the '98 finals were the only games where he stepped up like an MVP. Stank it up in the rest. Taking fadeaways, throwing up air balls etc. And part of the reason he wasn't clutch was because the fadeaway was his go-to move. He didn't have a diverse post game like a Duncan, Hakeem etc. A lot of his points came from running the floor and getting a bucket in transition. He'd hit a hook or those flip shots here and there but nothing special.

3. Kevin Garnett. Probably the best "all around" PF I ever saw. Not a single thing he couldn't on the court. Extremely versatile. He was out there playing some PG when Cassell went down, played some SF in his early years and guarded some centers as well. Probably underrated in the clutch as well. Look no further than his game 7 against the Kings in '04, also led the Celtics in 4th quarter scoring in '08 and has multiple gamewinning defensive plays (blocks, deflections etc). Wasn't offensively dominant, however.

[Yung D-Will]

1. Charles Barkley. His offensive game was excellent. Better than someone like Duncan's but his defense is what puts him behind him. Sir Charles was lazy and didn't put effort at all times. He'd gamble on the defensive end and often didn't get back in time in transition. He had all the defensive tools to be a monster on the defensive end but he lacked the mindset. And at times he was too aggresive, gambled and it didn't pay off for him. Also, would end up taking a break and not getting back in transition. On the other hand, his offensive game MORE THAN MADE UP for his poor defense. The way this guy would dominate games by scoring and rebounding would leave the casual fan astonished. He was out there getting a near triple double in the WCF, 44/24 in the '93 game 7, dropping 56 on a Warrior team with a rookie CWebb and Gatling, manhandling Buck Williams and Robinson in the '95 playoffs and made a great comeback in the '99 Laker/Rockets playoff series. Also, injuries shortened his career. Barkley himself said he planned on retiring after the '94 or '95 season due to back and knee injuries. Even said he wasn't a "good player' by 1997/98. He had no flaws in his offensive game save for settling for too many 3s.

2. Karl Malone. Never liked him. Felt he didn't deserve either of his MVPs. Should've gone to MJ and Zo. But, I can't deny his superb conditioning, longevity and a bunch of accolades. That's pretty much what puts him above KG but there's no way I'm taking this choke-artist over Garnett when it comes to building a team. Regarding his game, it was overrated. He wasn't as good of a defensive player as listed. Off the top of my head, he was listed as all defensive first team in '98 but was he really better than Duncan or Rodman that year? Doubt it. He was good at stripping the ball, had quick hands and good instincts but not a game changer defensively. Not much of a shot blocker either. His mid range game was excellent in the mid 90s and he was a great scorer. Top 5 in the league for several years. Wasn't clutch though which is the biggest knock on him. He'd fade away when the big moment came. Stockton was the one making big plays. Take a look at the '97 and '98 finals. Pretty much game 3 of the '97 finals and game 5 of the '98 finals were the only games where he stepped up like an MVP. Stank it up in the rest. Taking fadeaways, throwing up air balls etc. And part of the reason he wasn't clutch was because the fadeaway was his go-to move. He didn't have a diverse post game like a Duncan, Hakeem etc. A lot of his points came from running the floor and getting a bucket in transition. He'd hit a hook or those flip shots here and there but nothing special.

3. Kevin Garnett. Probably the best "all around" PF I ever saw. Not a single thing he couldn't on the court. Extremely versatile. He was out there playing some PG when Cassell went down, played some SF in his early years and guarded some centers as well. Probably underrated in the clutch as well. Look no further than his game 7 against the Kings in '04, also led the Celtics in 4th quarter scoring in '08 and has multiple gamewinning defensive plays (blocks, deflections etc). Wasn't offensively dominant, however.

+1

[32jazz]

Better scorer, yes. Though in the half court it's closer than you think.
Better rebounder, no. What Barkley did at his size is more impressive but numbers wise KG is easily the better rebounder, and his numbers are at a much lower pace. Young Barkley better on offensive rebounding only because he was so explosive at rebounding his own miss, but overall KG was better.
Better passer, slight edge to Barkley only because when he was on the Suns, he was so elite at passing out of the post, some called him the best passer below the FT line in those years. KG isn't someone to overlook here, he has better assist numbers than him, could make plays facing up, read doubles well, was almost too willing to pass at times but if he was on a good team during his prime, we'd be lauding him for his unselfish ball distribution.

KG is one of the most versatile defenders to ever play at his size. His mobility allows him to cover a huge area of the floor that not many 6'11+ guys have ever been to able to do. Even today, on a bum knee at 34 years old, he still anchored the best defense in the game. Goes from shading Kobe to covering the pick and roll to protecting the rim. He is everywhere. Barkley has never, ever, come close to impacting games like that on the other end. Whatever offensive edge you feel Barkley holds, is easily made up by KG's defensive impact. Sssuming they are on equally talented championship level teams, I'm not sure Barkleys extra 2-3 extra points on scoring make up for what KG provides on defense (especially because with a decent cast, offense is usually taken care of).

I would take 2004 KG over either of them, but it's close. Barkley is probably the best all around offensively. Malone is the best scorer and one on one defender in the post. KG though is Barkley's offensive skill and versatility with elite team D that can anchor historically great defenses. Neither of them are "clutch", Barkley had a nice string of clutch moments in '93 so he might have the edge but there are other duds. KG doesn't "choke" so much as he doesn't turn up his aggression at the end of games (scoring wise). Malone well...lets not go there.

KG. ALL DAY.EVERYDAY.

These guys(under the delusion that KG is not in the same league as Sir sloppy slob & ShreK MAlone ) were kids when Barkley/Malone played & nostalgia is strong here. Obviously these guys cannot get over the Dream Team era. In their pathetic minds no one shall ever surpass most of these guys.



Take KG all day over that fat slob Barkley who was nowhere near the inside defensive Force .(At times Barkley could be a slightly more explosive scorer & that is it). Malone neither is nowhere near as versatile as KG.

KG all day every

Barkley/Malone toss up. Skillwise I think Barkley is better than MAlone.

[cavsfanatic]

The internet

Ha ha

[bleedinpurpleTwo]

Malone > Barkley > KG

[Harison]

Each one has qualities in his favor:

Malone - longevity, numbers - but a lot of his scoring was benefitted by playing alongside the all-time assist leader, Stockton and Malone choked in the playoffs.

To be fair, outside Malone and Stockton they didnt had a very solid team, coaching is good though.

Garnett - best defense of the 3 but can he carry a team in the playoffs?

KG almost singlehandedly won against better Kings team in '04, it was phenomenal clinching game if anyone havent seen it. Still KG was blamed for lack of deep post-season runs, and hypothetical "what if Garnett had a solid team?" was answered in '08, he led the team in the Playoffs in almost everything - anchoring All-time great defense, rebounding, scoring, you name it.

I guess that answers if KG can do it, even after his prime.

I have to say Duncan. He is a true team leader. Garnett is a phenomenal player with great physical abilities but I don't think he is mentally strong enough to be a team leader. If he would have stayed in Minessota I don't think he would ever win a ring. He did the right move by going to Boston because there is Paul Pierce who is a true team leader that scores in clutch moments.

Its ironic, because Garnett and Duncan clutch data over many seasons is very close, almost carbon copy. And while Pierce is definitely clutch too, it was Garnett who led Celtics in the clutch during '08 championship run as well. About mental strength - Celtics took over KGs mentality and we know the result - very physical, tough, all-hustle team, you cant become All-time great defensive team without it.

Barkley - defense wasn't great but not a choker and can carry a team in the playoffs.

How many rings Barkley has? He was phenomenal offensively, but didnt play a lick of defense, and we all know saying "Defense wins championships".

To me that's why Duncan is the clear cut greatest power forward ever - had the offense, defense, could carry a team (especially in the playoffs) and "clutchness," all of which resulted in 4 titles.

First of all, we have to assume Duncan is PF, since he played more time as center. And if we place him as PF, he is Top1 because of accolades and individual performance, without accolades though he wouldnt be clear-cut first, he didnt had highest peak either.

Duncan was a big reason Spurs won 4 titles, alongside great teams he had and one of the best coaches.