Better overall career: Dirk Nowitzki or Karl Malone?

[hawkfan]

Better overall career: Dirk Nowitzki or Karl Malone?

[Miserio]

Bad timing. You're saying this in the middle of a Mavs championship when we all have seen one of the greatest clutch post-seasons ever.

[hawkfan]

Bad timing. You're saying this in the middle of a Mavs championship when we all have seen one of the greatest clutch post-seasons ever.

Malone never won a championship.

[Micku]

Malone never won a championship.

He was in Jordan's era as well.

It's a bad timing to talk about it since people are hype with the Mavs win.

[Rake2204]

Malone never won a championship.

Not to delve too terribly deep into this argument but I do not subscribe to the "This guy didn't win a championship" theory. His teams didn't win championships. I think the better thought to ponder would be, "Did Karl Malone do everything in his power to try to lead his team to glory?" And I think the answer is yes.

To average 25 and 11 over about 18 postseasons hints that there wasn't much more this guy could have done to help his team succeed. Surely, you can't just look at the numbers, but they do help tell the story. It also seems, in my opinion, that Malone largely played on "gritty" teams more often than outright talented ones. Malone and Stockton were Malone and Stockton, but a slightly aging Jeff Hornacek, Bryon Russell, Greg Ostertag, Adam Keefe. . .of the two teams Karl helped lead to the Finals (who both lost to Michael Jordan) I can't really blame him for losing. Like I said, they were solid as a unit, but it's not like they lost simply because Karl wasn't great or something of that nature.

I'm really pumped Dirk won a ring. But for me, personally, when comparing how good a player was next to another, ring total doesn't hold as much weight as it does to other people. Karl Malone was going big for a solid 17 years. He was still averaging 20ppg at age 39. That's borderline unheard of. For a quick comparision, Shaquille O'Neal averaged 9ppg at age 38.

So, I'm not saying Karl's better than Dirk. But I also wouldn't just pick Dirk because he's got a ring. Malone's awesome longevity sort of makes me think we should wait to see how Dirk rounds out his career before coming to a conclusion on this one. It's definitely an apt and worthy question in my opinion. Both of these guys are legends.

[DetroitPiston]

Dirk showed up in the finals this year, Malone choked repeatedly in the playoffs*. We remember the greatness but we forget the disasters. He definitely choked. Plus, of course, time heals wounds - we now remember Malone with fondness rather than for being the asshole that he was who was accused of failing to show up when it mattered most.

*Who now remembers how Jordan was in the position to hit that jumper over Russell to win the title? I do - and I recall Malone being involved.

[Micku]

Dirk showed up in the finals this year, Malone choked repeatedly in the playoffs*. We remember the greatness but we forget the disasters. He definitely choked. Plus, of course, time heals wounds - we now remember Malone with fondness rather than for being the asshole that he was who was accused of failing to show up when it mattered most.

*Who now remembers how Jordan was in the position to hit that jumper over Russell to win the title? I do - and I recall Malone being involved.

Dirk was considered to be a choker prior to this year. The Mavs in general were consider to be chokers. Dirk and the Mavs were constantly disappointing in the playoffs for a decade prior to this year.

And Karl Malone did lose to MJ bulls like all the other greats in the 90s. Replace the Mavs of 11 to the Jazz in 98. Have them go against the Bulls. MJ may steal the ball from Dirk and hit another game winner as well.

But it doesn't mean that Dirk isn't a great player or anything like that.

[SCdac]

Man, I feel sorry for fans who have been sticking up for Dirk for so long that the first thoughts that come to mind when they win are "YES, everybody on the internet will think about him in new light now! woohoo"... rather than, "My team that I've been supporting for years finally won, I'm going to party and enjoy this!" ... When the Spurs won, all I could hear car honking outside, screaming, and saw the masses celebrating down town. I hope Dallas does it right. There is so much more to a franchise than one player (nothing against Dirk, or even MJ, Duncan, other greats, etc).

[ShaqAttack3234]

Not to delve too terribly deep into this argument but I do not subscribe to the "This guy didn't win a championship" theory. His team's didn't win championships. I think the better thought to ponder would be, "Did Karl Malone do everything in his power to try to lead his team to glory?" And I think the answer is yes.

To average 25 and 11 over about 18 postseasons hints that there wasn't much more this guy could have done to help his team succeed. Surely, you can't just look at the numbers, but they do help tell the story. It also seems, in my opinion, that Malone largely played on "gritty" teams more often than outright talented ones. Malone and Stockton were Malone and Stockton, but a slightly aging Jeff Hornacek, Bryon Russell, Greg Ostertag, Adam Keefe. . .of the two teams Karl helped lead to the Finals (who both lost to Michael Jordan) I can't really blame him for losing. Like I said, they were solid as a unit, but it's not like they lost simply because Karl wasn't great or something of that nature.

I'm really pumped Dirk won a ring. But for me, personally, when comparing how good a player was next to another, ring total doesn't hold as much weight as it does to other people. Karl Malone was going big for a solid 17 years. He was still averaging 20ppg at age 39. That's borderline unheard of. For a quick comparision, Shaquille O'Neal averaged 9ppg at age 38.

So, I'm not saying Karl's better than Dirk. But I also wouldn't just pick Dirk because he's got a ring. Malone's awesome longevity sort of makes me think we should wait to see how Dirk rounds out his career before coming to a conclusion on this one. It's definitely an apt and worthy question in my opinion. Both of these guys are legends.

Stockton is also overrated which skews some people's opinions of Malone, but with that being said, I'm not sure I'd take Malone to lead my team to a title over Dirk because Dirk didn't have an overwhelming amount of talent around him this year or in 2006.

[JohnnySic]

Still Malone - #2 scorer all time and arguable top 15 of all time. Dirk is closing the gap though.

[kizut1659]

Not to delve too terribly deep into this argument but I do not subscribe to the "This guy didn't win a championship" theory. His team's didn't win championships. I think the better thought to ponder would be, "Did Karl Malone do everything in his power to try to lead his team to glory?" And I think the answer is yes.

To average 25 and 11 over about 18 postseasons hints that there wasn't much more this guy could have done to help his team succeed. Surely, you can't just look at the numbers, but they do help tell the story. It also seems, in my opinion, that Malone largely played on "gritty" teams more often than outright talented ones. Malone and Stockton were Malone and Stockton, but a slightly aging Jeff Hornacek, Bryon Russell, Greg Ostertag, Adam Keefe. . .of the two teams Karl helped lead to the Finals (who both lost to Michael Jordan) I can't really blame him for losing. Like I said, they were solid as a unit, but it's not like they lost simply because Karl wasn't great or something of that nature.

I'm really pumped Dirk won a ring. But for me, personally, when comparing how good a player was next to another, ring total doesn't hold as much weight as it does to other people. Karl Malone was going big for a solid 17 years. He was still averaging 20ppg at age 39. That's borderline unheard of. For a quick comparision, Shaquille O'Neal averaged 9ppg at age 38.

So, I'm not saying Karl's better than Dirk. But I also wouldn't just pick Dirk because he's got a ring. Malone's awesome longevity sort of makes me think we should wait to see how Dirk rounds out his career before coming to a conclusion on this one. It's definitely an apt and worthy question in my opinion. Both of these guys are legends.

I largely agree. I would put them as equal right now, with Dirk's ring counterbalanced by Malone's longevity. I would, however, blame Malone for the losses to the Bulls - the Bulls were ageing too (especially in 98), and if Malone would have played up to par and not come up short at criticial points (missed free throws in game 1 of 97 finals, having a ball stolen by Jordan in game 6 of 98 finals on that last possession etc.) - the Jazz could have won (and should have won in 98.) Given that, if Dirk plays at a high level for couple of years longer, i would put him past Malone.

[taucesays]

[kizut1659]

Accoridng to Broussard and Bayless whom I saw this morning Dirk is ranked behind Malone and Barkley. I disagree - i would put him past Barkley now and on par with Malone.

[Disaprine]

[brain drain]

People need to stop looking at raw numbers, the pace was different then.
Go check the playoff PER numbers for Dirk and Malone.