even if bball is a team sport, it's one of the few team sports where an individual can take over a game singlehandedly be the difference maker. it's a common belief that the greatest ones are able to do this in the big games.
But with the exception of MJ, I can't think of one guy who could truely control the game in the nba finals by taking over. Hakeem is close, but he never took over like mike did. Thats one of the reasons i view mj as the greatest of all time, but thats a different topic for later on.
i still think players are measured in this order: championships, mvp's, all star selections. i agree not having a championship shouldn't diminish malone's career and accomplishments, but he doesn't belong in the upper echelon of nba's all time greatest without it.
Championships do mean something, i agree. Especially when we compare players who are of equal value to their team. However, who they went up against is just as important. Malone and the Jazz ran into the best team in nba history, 2 years in a row. The spurs won when the league was in a massive transition in 99 (maybe the biggest in nba history, considering the lockout and the bulls breaking up) and last season, they ran into trouble against pheonix, and struggled against a laker team who was in terrible form (look at horry's shooting in that post season), a mavs team depleted by injuries and a nets team that almost took them to the brink, even though they were probably the worst team to make the finals since.. well a long time. If the 97 or 98 jazz was to be in either circumstance, i think they wouldve been nba champions.
is parish really one of the greatest centers in the history of the nba?
Thats scub's point i think. Robert Parish has won 4 rings, Ewing none. That doesnt make The chief better than patrick. Same with this scenario. Duncan has 2 rings, malone zero. That also doesnt make timmy automaticlly better.
I think this debate will be one for the ages if 2 things happen. Tim Duncan continues to produce at his rate for the next 5 to 6 years, and malone plays the till the end of next season, picks up the scoring record and one or two rings with the lakers. Then, who would be the best? I'd say a dead heat, with maybe a slight edge to malone still for having the scoring record, which means alot.
duncan last year won a championship with a roster less talented then the ones malone played with in 94, 95, 97, 98
I dont know how "less talented" duncans cast is. Stocktons greatness (like malones) has been measured through consistancy. An arguement can be made that he was never a top 10 player in the league. Hornicek was steve kerr upgraded, and got great looks becuase of the openings in the defense becuase of the attention malone drew, but he could also create his shot up until a point. ginnobili plays better defense tho. Stephen Jackson.. i would take him over Byron Russel. Tony parker wasnt on stocktons level, so i'll settle for that. And even the ghost of David Robinson would be more intimidating than greg foster or ostertag. There might be a slight advantage to the jazz becuase of stockton.. but once again, i think the league was a lot tougher in 97 and 98 than in 99 or 2003, mainly becuase of the bulls.