Spriggan

He really isn't though. Not at this point.

HallOfFamer

But at the pace Duncans at, I think he takes over the best PF spot of all time in a couple years.

EHL

If Duncan never wins another title or MVP award and only keeps up his current statistical pace for another 5 years, I would definitely put Malone ahead of Duncan. But if he wins another title and MVP this season or at some point in his career, I'd say his case for greatest PF of all time over Malone would be stronger than any case you could make for Malone, assuming Duncan produces statistically for at least another 5 years.

Johnny Mac

Considering that Duncan may show some of the same longevity that Malone did on top of winning and leading his team to two titles and nabbing two MVPs (so far) makes me think that Duncan will definitely be remembered as the greatest power forward of all time. Hell, Malone didnt even win his MVP awards until his mid-30s, I think Duncan will be a legit MVP candidate until hes 35, and the Spurs look like they'll be a contender until he retires, with Popovich, Parker, Manu, etc. So its not that far off to think Duncan could have anywhere from 3-5 MVP awards and 3-5 titles by the end of his career.

Minstrel

I don't think determining player value by MVPs or titles is valid. MVPs are very context-sensitive. Malone was up against much tougher competition for MVP awards, like Magic Johnson, Larry Bird, Michael Jordan, Hakeem Olajuwon, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar. Those are five of the all-time top-ten players.

Duncan would not have won MVP awards over Jordan, for example (mustache Jordan of the Wizards aside).

Titles, of course, are team-dependant and competition matters there, too. Duncan's Spurs would not have beaten the Showtime Lakers or the Jordan/Pippen Bulls.

Tim Duncan (or Kevin Garnett) might eclipse Karl Malone in the end. But it's certainly no guarantee. Malone's utter dominance is being totally forgotten due to his lackluster last couple of years. For the better part of two decades, he was scoring between 25-30 points per game, rebounding extremely well and playing very good defense. Malone was a much more destructive offensive force in the post than Duncan.

In Malone's prime, which was very long, he simply couldn't be stopped. Duncan cannot be characterized that way. He's very good, but he can be slowed and even marginalized. He's had plenty of games like that.

Malone hasn't, until his recent decline. When people talk about him "collapsing" in the playoffs, all they mean is his team lost or Rodman tripped him twice. His numbers were still outstanding.

__________________
You'll never live like common people
You'll never do what common people do
You'll never fail like common people
You'll never watch your life slide out of view
And dance and drink and screw
Because there's nothing else to do.

Debt Collector

i agree with the whole of this post - malone's prime years are superior to duncan's best seasons, and matches TD's MVP's 2-2 in the michael jordan era, though he didnt win a title, 3 finals appearances are significant as well as never missing the playoffs - very significant in my eyes

Johnny Mac

I am of the opinion that players should be judged by how good they were compared to the rest of the league, because otherwise Wilt Chamberlain wouldnt be so high on the top 10 list, neither would Bill Russell. They couldnt do the things they did back then in todays game, but they did it in their time. I compare them based on how dominant they were in their own era.

Pan Mengtu

That's completely unrealistic. Malone was a rookie the last year Kareem was a mvp-caliber player. You don't win MVPs as a rookie (unless you're wilt chamberlain).

Larry Bird was starting to slip by the time Malone became really good.

snowmt

Malone's competition for MVP is from Jordan, Barkeley,
Hakeem, Robinson and Shaq. Only Jordan was absolutely
better than him.

Hakeem, Barkeley, Robinson were all seriously declined when
Malone won his MVPs. He beated them by longevity.

Minstrel

Dominance in an era should be a factor, but I don't think it should be the only factor. Otherwise, Chamberlain should be #1 all-time and no one else should really even be close. Not Jordan, no one.

There's always the issue of adding context to the era accomplishments, especially when you're looking at things that depend on the era, like MVP awards. While talent overall may not vary too much from era to era, some eras may happen to have it concentrated in the top levels...which I think happened in the '80s and '90s. The top five over that stretch is superior to the top five players today, in my opinion. Would Duncan have won MVPs over Magic Johnson, Larry Bird, Hakeem Olajuwon and Michael Jordan? I don't think he would. Is it fair, then, to penalize Malone for not doing so?

I'm not saying Duncan doesn't compare to Malone. As I said, he could very well surpass Malone. But the suggestions that Duncan has already surpassed a guy who had an utterly dominant 15 years or so, or that he's guaranteed to do so, is very much jumping the gun. Duncan could do it. He by no means is guaranteed to do so.

__________________
You'll never live like common people
You'll never do what common people do
You'll never fail like common people
You'll never watch your life slide out of view
And dance and drink and screw
Because there's nothing else to do.

Pan Mengtu

Yeah, and it's not like Duncan's competition for MVP was bad.

Malone
Garnett
Shaq
Kobe
Kidd
Mourning

Plus all the upcoming MVP candidates while Duncan will still be dominant.

Minstrel

Larry Bird and Magic Johnson were the top players in the league for a number of very good Malone seasons. Hakeem Olajuwon, Charles Barkley, Shaquille O'Neal, David Robinson and Michael Jordan all had huge overlap with Malone.

The only players concurrent with Duncan on that level were Shaquille O'Neal (who began his decline when Duncan won his first MVP) and Kevin Garnett.

There's no one to even come close to rivalling Jordan today, who took six MVPs during Malone's prime.

__________________
You'll never live like common people
You'll never do what common people do
You'll never fail like common people
You'll never watch your life slide out of view
And dance and drink and screw
Because there's nothing else to do.

snowmt

And Malone got a MVP when Jordan was more deserving in 1996.

Minstrel

Those players arent anywhere near comparable.

Malone and O'Neal had both begun their decline phases when Duncan won his MVP. So they barely count. Mourning is barely relevant, as he's been essentially a non-factor since Duncan became an MVP candidate. Sure, they all were competitors for maybe three years of his career or so (O'Neal a couple years more).

Garnett is comparable.

Kobe and McGrady are the next most talented players and they're not on the level of Hakeem Olajuwon, Michael Jordan, Magic Johnson, Larry Bird, Charles Barkley or David Robinson. The first four are all-time top-ten players and the last two are usually put in the next five or ten players.

Kidd doesn't come close to sniffing this caliber of player.

__________________
You'll never live like common people
You'll never do what common people do
You'll never fail like common people
You'll never watch your life slide out of view
And dance and drink and screw
Because there's nothing else to do.

Minstrel