Who is more effective in 2020? Reggie Miller or Karl Malone?

[Kblaze8855]

All time it obviously isn’t a question....which is why I didn’t ask. Reggie clearly is more suited to today’s style than the style of the 90s. It’s a different question than it was 30 years ago.

You have to pay one of them 5 years 190 million. There is no option not to pay. Cap space is gone. You just choose who gets it then build the rest of your team around them with a 5 year plan. Who you taking?


This skill set:


https://youtu.be/GXFF-TXxoSw

[eliteballer]

Come on...Malone is on a totally different tier.

Especially if it's the MVP Malone who was unstoppable from midrange.

[Kblaze8855]

Or this one:



https://youtu.be/459NuJnRyxQ


Done in two very different halves because young Karl did not play like old Karl and I was kinda trying to make that show when it was made long ago. But most of Karl’s scoring skill set is in there. Second half mostly when he wasn’t dunking on everything moving and stomping around like an idiot as much.

[Kblaze8855]

Come on...Malone is on a totally different tier.

Especially if it's the MVP Malone who was unstoppable from midrange.


Artis Gilmore is on a different tier in 1975 than Pistol Pete. He was drafted first out of the ABA. Not Doctor J. Not Moses Malone.

Doesnt make him more suitable to play right now.

Reggie would probably score 27-30 a game. He would be looked at as an entirely different tier of player.

Karl with no Stockton in a league guards rather pull up from 3 than look for you on the roll?

Its not a question of better. It’s a question of fit. Prime Dwight was way better than Reggie.

Put them on the same team right now people would argue over who’s team it is depending on the coach. Dantoni could make Dwight look like Andre Drummond the way he’s doing these days.

[eliteballer]

Artis Gilmore is on a different tier in 1975 than Pistol Pete. He was drafted first out of the ABA. Not Doctor J. Not Moses Malone.

Doesnt make him more suitable to play right now.

Reggie would probably score 27-30 a game. He would be looked at as an entirely different tier of player.

Karl with no Stockton in a league guards rather pull up from 3 than look for you on the roll?

Its not a question of better. It’s a question of fit.

Karl could run the floor, shoot. Board. Defend. Great athlete.

Excelled in the pick and roll/pick and pop which is all everyone in the league does now.

How is he any less effective than say...Giannis who can't shoot to save his life.

[Whoah10115]

Karl is too good. Some levels of great just translate.

[Kblaze8855]

Karl was a man to man body you up post defender. Which wouldn’t be worth what it used to be.

It would come down to team I’d say.

The Bucks plus Reggie or Karl....they take Reggie. Same with the lakers. It isn’t as simple as taking ____ no matter what. Reggie vs Bird you take Bird no matter who else is on the team. You make it work somehow. Karl?

The Sixers don’t take him over Reggie.

Its situational not a no questions asked answer.

[Lebron23]

Karl is too good. Some levels of great just translate.

Yes, It's like Giannis vs Middleton. Miller would be a better Khris Middleton in today's nba.

[SouBeachTalents]

Karl was a man to man body you up post defender. Which wouldn’t be worth what it used to be.

It would come down to team I’d say.

The Bucks plus Reggie or Karl....they take Reggie. Same with the lakers. It isn’t as simple as taking ____ no matter what. Reggie vs Bird you take Bird no matter who else is on the team. You make it work somehow. Karl?

The Sixers don’t take him over Reggie.

Its situational not a no questions asked answer.
How many players make your "take no matter what" list? 10?

[eliteballer]

Karl was a man to man body you up post defender. Which wouldn’t be worth what it used to be.

It would come down to team I’d say.

The Bucks plus Reggie or Karl....they take Reggie. Same with the lakers. It isn’t as simple as taking ____ no matter what. Reggie vs Bird you take Bird no matter who else is on the team. You make it work somehow. Karl?

The Sixers don’t take him over Reggie.

Its situational not a no questions asked answer.

Karl was a good enough athlete and skilled enough that he would adjust. He'd drop some weight to increase his speed on the perimeter.

[Kblaze8855]

Against Reggie Miller to play right now? I suspect it would get past 40 or 50 even without thinking or digging into who I forgot. But there are way way waaaaay more players better at basketball. It isn’t the same question. Rules and play style matter.

Okafor might not be rotting on a bench 30 years ago. And someone may try to make something of Boban like they did Shawn Bradley insisting he was a franchise player over his size and relative
mobility. But it is what it is.

[Kblaze8855]

Karl was a good enough athlete and skilled enough that he would adjust. He'd drop some weight to increase his speed on the perimeter.

Well if he’s not the same player are we talking about the same player?

Im talking Reggie exactly as he was dropped into this season.

Youre talking about Karl being modified. Which I agree he may be able to do. But its not really asking about the Karl Malone that existed is it?

[Whoah10115]

The Bucks plus Reggie or Karl....they take Reggie. Same with the lakers. It isn’t as simple as taking ____ no matter what. Reggie vs Bird you take Bird no matter who else is on the team. You make it work somehow. Karl?

The Sixers don’t take him over Reggie.



The Bucks have the b2b MVP at the 4. And despite his end-to-end game, he's not a shooter.

The Sixers are one of the biggest teams ever. They have a huge center, a hybrid big man, and a thick tweener in their lineup, plus their PG was a PF coming into the league and can't shoot.

Generally speaking, you take team into consideration with almost all of the very best ever.

[tontoz]

Malone wouldnt be able to use his strength advantage as much today. He was stronger than everyone he faced except Shaq and he took full advantage of that on both ends.

He wasnt a rim protector. Chasing guys off the 3 pt line wasnt his thing either.

He would surely be an All-Star but he was perfectly suited to his era. This era, not so much.

The comparison isnt as lopsided as it seems at first glance. Reggie would be a perfect fit in this era. He ran around so much off the ball he makes Klay look lazy.

Someone once asked Reggie what it was like being guarded by Bruce Bowen, an elite defender who was notorious for his physical,sometimes dirty play. Reggie replied that he cant hold what he cant catch. Guys hated guarding him.

[Reggie43]

Karl Malone would be Mvp caliber in any era. He was, plain and simple just a smart basketball player that could have adjusted to any style of play as evidenced by him winning Mvp at an age where other players are a few years away from retiring.

[Kblaze8855]

Mvp caliber is a tough thing to define. Zo was second I think when Karl won his second mvp. Is Zo mvp caliber?

Karl didn’t have to adjust to a new era anywhere near as striking as the difference between then and now. The same kinds of players were key to winning.

A player his size who doesn’t handle the ball and also isn’t good on a switch isn’t as useful as it would be for 60 years.

Karl is obviously way way better as a basketball player. But that really isn’t the issue at all. We have guys like Trae Young out here doing like 30/9 as sophomores. The league simply will not allow you to guard people who play outside. Reggie doesn’t have the handles to attack straight up but the freedom of movement rules we’re pretty much made for Reggie.

Total skill set wise Reggie wasn’t as good as a lot of people but in a race to 130 points in a no d league that wants spacing first and foremost?

The gap seriously thins.

Best total player and most effective right now aren’t the same thing. This is just a matter of how much modern ball thins it.

40 years ago post scoring and being able to handle the resulting double team made you better than your total skill set. Now shooting does when the winner of a playoff series often swings on who shot well for a week.

Halfway good shooters are what halfway good big men used to be. Getting the ball even if they don’t do shit with it.

[RRR3]

Mvp caliber is a tough thing to define. Zo was second I think when Karl won his second mvp. Is Zo mvp caliber?

Karl didn’t have to adjust to a new era anywhere near as striking as the difference between then and now. The same kinds of players were key to winning.

A player his size who doesn’t handle the ball and also isn’t good on a switch isn’t as useful as it would be for 60 years.

Karl is obviously way way better as a basketball player. But that really isn’t the issue at all. We have guys like Trae Young out here doing like 30/9 as sophomores. The league simply will not allow you to guard people who play outside. Reggie doesn’t have the handles to attack straight up but the freedom of movement rules we’re pretty much made for Reggie.

Total skill set wise Reggie wasn’t as good as a lot of people but in a race to 130 points in a no d league that wants spacing first and foremost?

The gap seriously thins.

Best total player and most effective right now aren’t the same thing. This is just a matter of how much modern ball thins it.

40 years ago post scoring and being able to handle the resulting double team made you better than your total skill set. Now shooting does when the winner of a playoff series often swings on who shot well for a week.

Halfway good shooters are what halfway good big men used to be. Getting the ball even if they don’t do shit with it.
Can we get some examples of "halfway good shooters" and "halfway good big men"?

[HoopsNY]

I think Malone would thrive in today's NBA. Based on the numbers we do have, Malone shot over 45% between 16-29 ft. And I believe he would develop his 3 pt shot in today's game. He hit 85-310 in his career (.274%). So I think it's reasonable that he could become a 30% shooter in today's game from deep, hitting maybe 30-40 threes a season. Amazing endurance and durability, coupled with his mid-range game....he'd basically be the same player.

[Clippersfan86]

Miller wouldn't even be as good as a modern day Klay. Karl Malone would still be a superstar. He had underrated handles and footwork and was lights out in pick and pop. He'd translate just fine.

[HoopsNY]

Miller wouldn't even be as good as a modern day Klay. Karl Malone would still be a superstar. He had underrated handles and footwork and was lights out in pick and pop. He'd translate just fine.

Why? They're very similar in abilities.

[warriorfan]

Karl Malone would be Mvp caliber in any era. He was, plain and simple just a smart basketball player that could have adjusted to any style of play as evidenced by him winning Mvp at an age where other players are a few years away from retiring.

I think so too. He’s too physically dominant and talented. He’s strong and athletic and can finish in many ways around the hoop. He can shoot. He would feast in transition. He is a scorer in any era.

[Round Mound]

Karl Malone like Charles Barkley would be too rough for today's nba. Reggie was a clutch shooter. Thats about it. Malone was a scorer, rebounder, good defender and deadly from mid range as he aged in the late 90s.

[tontoz]

Some of you guys clearly didn't watch Malone play. He was not a guy with a lot of moves. In the half court he would face up and shoot a jumper or try to bull his way the basket. He had weak hops and little creativity so he wasn't a great finisher inside. He was constantly shooting off balance in side hoping to get bailed out by the refs. That is why he typically struggled in the playoffs when the defense got more intense and refs swallowed their whistles.

He was at his best on the break because he could outrun opposing bigs but again those opportunities were harder to come by in the playoffs.

[Xiao Yao You]

Karl could score around the rim and he would have more space to work down there today, get to the free throw line and defend. He wasn't a rim protector and might have to play more 5 today but it's not too hard to imagine him developing a 3. Obviously the only question with Reggie today would be on the defensive end

[Clippersfan86]

Why? They're very similar in abilities.

Klay is a WAY more capable defender. Much bigger and stronger.

[Reggie43]

Klay is a WAY more capable defender. Much bigger and stronger.

Being a more capable defender isnt that much when the real diffrence between them is that Miller has lead his own teams to multiple deep playoff runs and even once to the Finals while Klay has never faced the pressure of carrying his own team and has always had the pleasure of multiple players being better than him on their runs.

[GimmeThat]

Reggie might come off as a defensive genius with a bunch of white players, but I still think you take Malone

[Dr Hawk]

Malone. I think this would be a great era for him to play in.

[brownmamba00]

I'll take Reggie. Get him surrounded by forwards that like to pass (draymond kevin love sabonis) and guards that can defend (beverley, holiday, etc).

Karl would be a beast in this era no doubt. A bulky power forward that has wet spots in the mid range would do well. And he was tough as nails.

But if i'm paying up 200 mill I want you to take the last shot.

[LukeWalton]

Funny thing is Reggie was close to winning a ring.
Celtics asked him to un-retire and join them. he declined
that was the year the Celtics won

[Kblaze8855]

Being a more capable defender isnt that much when the real diffrence between them is that Miller has lead his own teams to multiple deep playoff runs and even once to the Finals while Klay has never faced the pressure of carrying his own team and has always had the pleasure of multiple players being better than him on their runs.

That isnt a "real" difference though. Thats a "Arguing about basketball" difference not something you actually do on a court. Thats just how we talk sports. Taking your team on a deep run doesnt actually mean you are better at anything. Its not a skill. Its just something that happened. Considering that Klay wipes out the advantage Reggie has over most players ever(shooting) and is a far better defender....sure...hes a better total player than Reggie.

Reggie has more in his bag scoring wise but some of that may be because Klay is specifically told NOT to do some of the inbetween things Reggie did. But thats hypothetical. In the world we have...Reggie showed more 22 feet and in game which would be useful in clutch situations. And he was a much more crafty player far as drawing fouls which is another major thing these days when they just give the offense all the 50/50 calls.

Reggie could be a better franchise player than Klay right now. But he was never a better player. He was a better defender than hes given credit for at times but Klay is a great defender and an all time elite shooter....too elite for Reggie to be better because of his shooting. And his shooting is pretty much the only reason he was better than anyone.

Klay is the unusual great defender among the few shooters of Reggies caliber and unlike the Nash, Steph, Bird, and Durant(guys also up there as pure shooters) Reggie doesnt have playmaking or a total game to make up for it. Reggie is closer to the Glen Rice side of the GOAT shooters list as a total player than he is to the guys I mentioned because they do so many other things.

But shooting is such an overwhelming skill the way the game has gone....being a pure shooter with some in between game means more than it used to. So Reggie didnt get better of course...the game got better for him.

[Phoenix]

Reggie seamlessly translates for obvious reasons but I still feel like you need to plug in more holes around him if he's your best player. He was too scrawny to be more than an irritant defensively, barely rebounded or much of a passer. He was an all-time great off-ball assist target whose main attribute is the most valuable skill in 2020. Combined Stephs off-ball movement with Klays stroke( though I think Klay can get even hotter).

Malone, I think is more situational in terms of what team today best utilizes his skills but if you found him a good PnR partner who was as good with feeding him as looking for their own shot like a CP3, what he was blends into 2020 more than fine. I look at someone like Aldridge who's been 21/9 as recently as last year and that's without being the transition target Mailman would be. When you see Lebron or Giannis coming down the lane, you don't want any of that. Mailman was a brick wall at 6'9 and 260 or whatever. He's not elevating like Bron but the sight of him barreling towards the rim at you isnt any less intimidating. And he shot more than good enough, especially by the mid 90s.

[Kblaze8855]

Well yea it doesnt matter what era it is you cant stop Karl on the break or in a catch and finish situation. But like you said a lot of it would come down to who he had to feed him.

[Phoenix]

I guess if it comes down to portability, Reggie in 2020 is going to be less reliant on having the right team around him because his best skill is the most important in this era. He could more or less be the same guy on most teams. I still think Mailman would be a better player in this era, but current conditions don't make him better than he was in 95. And yeah, his PG running mate will be important in maximizing him. Whereas yeah, Reggie's ability is magnified and its effect enhanced with what 2020 ball represents.

[Kblaze8855]

Karl Malone like Charles Barkley would be too rough for today's nba. Reggie was a clutch shooter. Thats about it. Malone was a scorer, rebounder, good defender and deadly from mid range as he aged in the late 90s.


Charles translates better than Karl id say. Charles wasnt a graceful ball handler but you could give him the ball to create and he didnt need anyone to set him up in transition. He might set you up. Charles played the 3 quite a bit as im sure you know. Karl has more adjusting to do.

And Reggie wasnt a clutch shooter and thats it. Reggie was a flat out good to great scorer by todays standards skillset wise. He just looked lacking when the rules of the time didnt favor him and he had to use 40 screens to get 18 points because he couldnt handle the ball to attack off the dribble. Guys like him were slowed. But since? They did all they could to limit isolation back to the basket bigs from gumming up the lane. The 5 second back to the basket rule alone takes a lot of baskets from bigs who would punish you into double teaming.

I dont think people realize how drastically the freedom of movement rules changed off ball play because we as fans are prone to ball watching. Half the shit guys like Starks and Jordan did to defend Reggie are illegal now.

And im not sure "deadly" is the word for Karls midrange when most of the time they lost it was largely because he wasnt that special when forced away from his easy baskets. Dirks midrange was deadly. And Bird. Durant. Jordan. Malones was....very good id say. But deadly? I watched teams do their best to get him to play that way because he couldnt always hurt you.

[Reggie43]

That isnt a "real" difference though. Thats a "Arguing about basketball" difference not something you actually do on a court. Thats just how we talk sports. Taking your team on a deep run doesnt actually mean you are better at anything. Its not a skill. Its just something that happened. Considering that Klay wipes out the advantage Reggie has over most players ever(shooting) and is a far better defender....sure...hes a better total player than Reggie.

Reggie has more in his bag scoring wise but some of that may be because Klay is specifically told NOT to do some of the inbetween things Reggie did. But thats hypothetical. In the world we have...Reggie showed more 22 feet and in game which would be useful in clutch situations. And he was a much more crafty player far as drawing fouls which is another major thing these days when they just give the offense all the 50/50 calls.

Reggie could be a better franchise player than Klay right now. But he was never a better player. He was a better defender than hes given credit for at times but Klay is a great defender and an all time elite shooter....too elite for Reggie to be better because of his shooting. And his shooting is pretty much the only reason he was better than anyone.

Klay is the unusual great defender among the few shooters of Reggies caliber and unlike the Nash, Steph, Bird, and Durant(guys also up there as pure shooters) Reggie doesnt have playmaking or a total game to make up for it. Reggie is closer to the Glen Rice side of the GOAT shooters list as a total player than he is to the guys I mentioned because they do so many other things.

But shooting is such an overwhelming skill the way the game has gone....being a pure shooter with some in between game means more than it used to. So Reggie didnt get better of course...the game got better for him.

What i meant was Klay took advantage of being the 3rd best player in the scouting report on the opposing defenses on their best runs making it much easier to produce his numbers with the other team focused on Kd and Curry thus getting more open shots.

Add in the fact that he has had the advantage playing with the no handchecking, freedom of movement modern rules yet Miller still beats him peak for peak with higher per game averages and better percentages all this with Klay having more attempts.

[Kblaze8855]

I guess if it comes down to portability, Reggie in 2020 is going to be less reliant on having the right team around him because his best skill is the most important in this era. He could more or less be the same guy on most teams. I still think Mailman would be a better player in this era, but current conditions don't make him better than he was in 95. And yeah, his PG running mate will be important in maximizing him. Whereas yeah, Reggie's ability is magnified and its effect enhanced with what 2020 ball represents.


I wouldnt say Reggie was better at basketball than Karl Malone even in this era. But the rules of your league matter. If the NBA suddenly makes dunks worth 4 points Rudy Gobert just got a lot more effective. But not better. The rules and style around you are a big part of being effective....but no part of your skillset.

Karl is better than Reggie today or 1930.

But better period doesnt make you more useful when the league decides they dont want the style you built your game to suit.

[Phoenix]

I wouldnt say Reggie was better at basketball than Karl Malone even in this era. But the rules of your league matter. If the NBA suddenly makes dunks worth 4 points Rudy Gobert just got a lot more effective. But not better. The rules and style around you are a big part of being effective....but no part of your skillset.

Karl is better than Reggie today or 1930.

But better period doesnt make you more useful when the league decides they dont want the style you built your game to suit.

Yes I think we're in the same general ballpark. 'How good' in a vacuum vs utility based on how the game is played now.

[Phoenix]

Blaze since you were saying Reggie probably does 27 in this era, what would you say Karl produces? Obviously team dependent, but let's just say on a team build where he's the featured scorer with a generous PnR partner?

[PP34Deuce]

I agree prime reggie would be great in todays game. He became defensively a liability the last 4 5 years but was still tough

I still think Horace Grant in todays smaller space and pace game would be even better. dude could shoot midrange great..decent post..play defense..and run the floor. Hed probably be a 19-11 player in todays game.

[Kblaze8855]

Karl would still score. Too many possessions and too much running and he’d be a mismatch one on one whenever his team decided to let him do it. But it would be like the late 80s. Karl might score 28-30 if you designed your team for him to do it. But an 18ppg washed up Mchale off the bench could get you one basket under duress at a similar or better rate. The rules have turned genius off the ball execution and shooting into a more reliable 27 than a powerhouse 27 with the added benefit of being more more valuable for coaches looking for space. Which is all of them.

[Horatio33]

In a vacuum Malone is the much superior basketballer than Miller, but in 2020 Miller's skill set is more valuable than Malone. Malone would still be good in this era, not as good as his peak, whereas Miller would flourish.

[RogueBorg]

Reggie might come off as a defensive genius with a bunch of white players, but I still think you take Malone

Reggie couldn't play defense back then he surely isn't playing any today. He's a one-trick pony, couldn't rebound, didn't get many assists, was not a ball handler, and of course no D in Reggie.

[r0drig0lac]

i'm going with the best player, in any era

[r0drig0lac]

Yes, It's like Giannis vs Middleton. Miller would be a better Khris Middleton in today's nba.

no, he would be what some people think Klay Thompson can be without Curry and Dray ... a real first option in a good team (which Klay obviously doesn't have the capacity to be)

[Stephonit]

Is anyone going to point out that even in their time Reggie Miller came closer to beating the Jordan Bulls in a series than Karl ever did? Who did Reggie have on his team helping him? Rik Smits? Jalen Rose?

[Kblaze8855]

3(one time) all star bigs and mark Jackson. With a healthy dose of Travis best and washed up Mullin and Mckey. I suspect that team set the record for most one time all stars on it. They had 4 at least. The Davis twins were “The centers are gone” all stars though not normal ones.

[Roundball_Rock]

Is anyone going to point out that even in their time Reggie Miller came closer to beating the Jordan Bulls in a series than Karl ever did? Who did Reggie have on his team helping him? Rik Smits? Jalen Rose?

Miller 17/2/2 on 42%, 11.6 game score (MJ, Pippen, Kukoc exceeded him)
Malone 25/11/4 on 50%, 18.5 game score (second behind MJ)

This is why. Miller never carried his teams. People underrate Smits' role. Per minute Smits was actually featured more than Miller in the Indiana offense. Miller was very limited in how he could scorer (although great at the things he did) so that capped his ceiling as a scorer, especially back then, and he didn't contribute meaningfully in any area other than scoring.

[Goalgoalabc]

Karl Malone, as no one know how to defense pick and roll right now

[Axe]

There's a reason why karl malone was called the 'mailman'

[tontoz]

It should also be noted that Malone's game fell off noticeably in the playoffs.

For his career Malone shot 46.3% from the field and 74% from the line in the playoffs. He wasn't shooting 3s so his FG% accurately reflects his scoring efficiency.

[lucky001]

https://youtu.be/BtL_zCF6qgQ

Miller raised his game in the playoffs. Malone dipped.

In 2020, miller would be top 2 in catch and shoot. Plus he had the modern foul baiting game down. Add to that his spindly frame and he'd challenge harden for the 4 point play crown.

[Norcaliblunt]

The better question is if you add Reggie Miller to those Jazz teams do they win the finals?

[LoneyROY7]

Seriously?

This is pretty disrespectful to Karl.

[Axe]

The better question is if you add Reggie Miller to those Jazz teams do they win the finals?
Most likely.