Kevin McHale or Karl Malone...WHO Was a Better Player?

[Round Mound]

[plowking]

ISH logic... 3>0

All you need to know.

[Harison]

[robert de niro]

KM for sure

[Round Mound]

ISH logic... 3>0

All you need to know.

For his 1st 2 rings (1981 & 1984) he was a 6thman but the 1986-88 version of him was probably the most onstoppable post player ever for many people who saw him (Steven A Smith one of them).

1986 Kevin McHale Final Stats vs The Rockets

1st In Scoring: 25.8 PPG (on 17.2 FGAs Taken Only)
On 57.3%FG
8.5 RPG
2.5 BPG

Holding HOFer Ralph Sampson to ONLY 14.8 PPG On 43.8% FG Shooting

[24-Inch_Chrome]

The one whose first name starts with "K" and last name ends with "e," initials KM.

[Leroy Jetson]

Malone and it's not even close.

[Dresta]

McHale played better when it really mattered. Malone was always a mental weakling in the body of a terminator. One of them shot 56% in the playoffs, the other, 46%. Malone is the king of aggregated stats, and little else.

[Prime_Shaq]

The one whose first name starts with "K" and last name ends with "e," initials KM.

So obvious

[Jasper]

why does ISH question Malones cred.

Karl Malone is the 2nd highest scorer EVER in the league.

Even though him in Stockton were great options we already know that his era it took three all-star type players on a team to win chips.

Mchale had Bird and Chief .

[SHAQisGOAT]

[aj1987]

Both are better than Barkley, OP.

[COLOR="White"]inb4meltdown[/COLOR]

[Thorpesaurous]

In terms of historical achievement, it's obviously Malone.

But as someone who saw both guys, if it were my team I'd take McHale in a heartbeat. McHale is one of the most unique ability vs. numbers guys ever because of how much he bent himself for the good of the team.

Malone to me was maybe the best player ever at getting and making the easy shots. Weather it was using his physicality to get way deep in the post to make an easy shot. Outrunning his opponent, which he's really underrated at. And obviously just finding space in that pick and roll. But his game lacked much in the way of counters. If those handful of things were taken away, he didn't adjust well.

McHale's post game could serve as an offensive foundation. It would've been nice had he been a better passer, but that to me is a smaller sin. And defensively the gap is enormous. McHale has a great rep as a rim protector, but is underrated as a perimeter guy before he destroyed his ankle playing through the playoffs on a broken foot.

My fondness of McHale is admittedly higher than pretty much anyone. I'd take him over Barkley for similar defensive reasons. And I'd consider him over Garnett, who's an all time defender and an excellent offensive player, but his game on that end has some of the same flaws as Malone's in that while it's very versatile, it lacked some of the forcefulness that McHale's post game had that feels more foundational.

McHale would be a fascinating player as a center in the current league. He could be a switching machine. Something like Jo Noah on that end, and a more efficient Zack Randolph on the other.

[Dresta]

why does ISH question Malones cred.

Karl Malone is the 2nd highest scorer EVER in the league.

Even though him in Stockton were great options we already know that his era it took three all-star type players on a team to win chips.

Mchale had Bird and Chief .

I already called him the king of aggregated stats (something pretty unimportant if you ask me), but he doesn't have much cred because of his consistently poor performances in the playoffs.

3 all-star type players? You know the Rockets won in 94 & 95, right? Malone had a good chance in 94, and he shot atrociously for a big man, as was so common with him in the playoffs.

[L.Kizzle]

Malone easily ... next.