Im Still Ballin
01-05-2023, 10:54 AM
Insight from one of InsideHoop's greatest minds. Do you agree with his view on Kevin McHale?
http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?7592-Charles-Barkley-vs-Karl-Malone-who-s-better&p=142057&viewfull=1#post142057
I think they're both a little overrated. Malone is a better defender, but he's an on ball defender. He wasn't a good help defender at all for a PF. And offensively, he's consistent, but he lacked the creativity that most great players had.
Barkley is an anomaly. He's as difficult a cover as the leagues probably ever seen. Too quick and crafty for PFs, and too strong for SFs. And at times, he was quicker and had more ball skills than even SFs, and could overpower even the best PFs.
But defensively, his size was always an issue. He had to go after everything, shots and rebounds, so much, that he was often out of position. It wasn't as much an issue of effort as it's made out to be.
At his peak, I'd definitely take him over Malone. But I don't think either of them is as good as Duncan, or even McHale.
http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?7592-Charles-Barkley-vs-Karl-Malone-who-s-better&p=142098&viewfull=1#post142098
Duncan's game most resembles McHale's. And my preference for both of them stems from their both being better at defending the rim.
Obviously, there's a lot of projection with McHale not being a number one option, but none of the other guys would have been either with Bird on their team. And only Duncan has proven that he could win it on his own, so if Mchale were a number one option on a team, he wouldn't have to even win a title to prove he was in the neighborhood of Malone and Barkley.
Barkley is clearly the hardest to defend in the group.
http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?7592-Charles-Barkley-vs-Karl-Malone-who-s-better&p=142171&viewfull=1#post142171
I know I'm in limited company with my opinion of McHale, and that's completely understandable. It's just something I've believed for a long time. And I don't put much weight into any of those kinds of quotes that players make. But it's always fun to read Barkley's ramblings, and Andrew Toney was a monster.
http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?380657-Kevin-McHale-or-Karl-Malone-WHO-Was-a-Better-Player&p=11508210&viewfull=1#post11508210
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. Whether 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 handfuls 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.
http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?380657-Kevin-McHale-or-Karl-Malone-WHO-Was-a-Better-Player&p=11512017&viewfull=1#post11512017
I am saying Malone isn't an offensive foundation. And I know that seems weird considering the ridiculous number of points he scored.
But it's your second point that is the reason. I do care how easy the points were, because it's exactly that reason that I have concerns running an offense through him. And I think it defines some of his post season failures because teams knew they could change looks at him and affect his play. I think that's the reason so many of the big situations those Jazz teams were in, the ball wound up in Stockton or even Jeff Hornacek's hands. They may make a decision to go to Karl, but it was more often or not their decision.
And like I said, if we're doing a historical list, some kind of a ranking, then Malone is clearly ahead. But if I'm running the team and I get to choose between these two skill sets, I'd take McHale.
https://thumbs.gfycat.com/AcidicFrankLamb-size_restricted.gif
https://thumbs.gfycat.com/PotablePessimisticArgusfish-max-1mb.gif
http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?7592-Charles-Barkley-vs-Karl-Malone-who-s-better&p=142057&viewfull=1#post142057
I think they're both a little overrated. Malone is a better defender, but he's an on ball defender. He wasn't a good help defender at all for a PF. And offensively, he's consistent, but he lacked the creativity that most great players had.
Barkley is an anomaly. He's as difficult a cover as the leagues probably ever seen. Too quick and crafty for PFs, and too strong for SFs. And at times, he was quicker and had more ball skills than even SFs, and could overpower even the best PFs.
But defensively, his size was always an issue. He had to go after everything, shots and rebounds, so much, that he was often out of position. It wasn't as much an issue of effort as it's made out to be.
At his peak, I'd definitely take him over Malone. But I don't think either of them is as good as Duncan, or even McHale.
http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?7592-Charles-Barkley-vs-Karl-Malone-who-s-better&p=142098&viewfull=1#post142098
Duncan's game most resembles McHale's. And my preference for both of them stems from their both being better at defending the rim.
Obviously, there's a lot of projection with McHale not being a number one option, but none of the other guys would have been either with Bird on their team. And only Duncan has proven that he could win it on his own, so if Mchale were a number one option on a team, he wouldn't have to even win a title to prove he was in the neighborhood of Malone and Barkley.
Barkley is clearly the hardest to defend in the group.
http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?7592-Charles-Barkley-vs-Karl-Malone-who-s-better&p=142171&viewfull=1#post142171
I know I'm in limited company with my opinion of McHale, and that's completely understandable. It's just something I've believed for a long time. And I don't put much weight into any of those kinds of quotes that players make. But it's always fun to read Barkley's ramblings, and Andrew Toney was a monster.
http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?380657-Kevin-McHale-or-Karl-Malone-WHO-Was-a-Better-Player&p=11508210&viewfull=1#post11508210
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. Whether 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 handfuls 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.
http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?380657-Kevin-McHale-or-Karl-Malone-WHO-Was-a-Better-Player&p=11512017&viewfull=1#post11512017
I am saying Malone isn't an offensive foundation. And I know that seems weird considering the ridiculous number of points he scored.
But it's your second point that is the reason. I do care how easy the points were, because it's exactly that reason that I have concerns running an offense through him. And I think it defines some of his post season failures because teams knew they could change looks at him and affect his play. I think that's the reason so many of the big situations those Jazz teams were in, the ball wound up in Stockton or even Jeff Hornacek's hands. They may make a decision to go to Karl, but it was more often or not their decision.
And like I said, if we're doing a historical list, some kind of a ranking, then Malone is clearly ahead. But if I'm running the team and I get to choose between these two skill sets, I'd take McHale.
https://thumbs.gfycat.com/AcidicFrankLamb-size_restricted.gif
https://thumbs.gfycat.com/PotablePessimisticArgusfish-max-1mb.gif