Spurs vs Jazz (the malone stockton days)
 

on 1280 today they had a little debate are the trio of:

Tony Parker, Tim Duncan and Manu Ginobili better than that of John Stockton, Karl Malone and Jeff Hornacek?

I say the Spurs trio is better for a few reasons.

1. 2 championships together
2. Ginobili is more versatile than Horny, he is a better slasher, better finisher around the rim and a better defender, Horny is a better pure shooter but Ginobili can also light it up.
3. Tim Duncan is a better defensive player than Malone, he can block shots, he can defend the pick and roll, he is a great rebounder. Malone was a good rebounder and is a better pure scorer with a nasty side but i still take duncan.
4. I think Stockton is better than parker however if you compare the two at the age of 25, stockton was not a full time starter and he averaged 7 points and 8 assists that year. Parker on the other hand has started for 6 seasons now and averaged 18 points and 5.5 assists this year. I think this is still inconclusive but i dont see how John Stockton would be able to guard Parker.

I think overall the Spurs trio is better. When it is all said and done and they are all retired they will leave no doubt.

Everyone has been talking recently that Duncan is probably the best power forward to play the game.

I think Duncan is the better defender hands down. On offense, it is probably a wash. Or maybe a slight edge to Malone, just because he is what the 2nd highest scorer of all time.

But the defensive difference is greater than the offensive difference, so I give the nod to Duncan.

Malone was a better scorer all around. Better shooter, better on the block, better from the foul line, and did it over a longer period of time.

Malone was an All-NBA defender multiple times.

Malone did not play next to David Robinson.

so do you think Malone is the better power forward?

Let's remember, Duncan hasn't played with one of the league's alltime best passers. Imagine if DUncan and Nash were on the same team. That would be sick.

Karl Malone was a very good defender...something that people forget. He was on the All NBA Defensive 1st Team several times.

Defensively he drove David Robinson bonkers.

Of course I do. It's not by much, but I think Malone is/was better.

Malone didn't play with one one of the better centers of all time.

Duncan didn't play against the greatest player of all time in two finals.

Duncan is an incredible help defender.

Malone was not.

I don't think anyone could legitimately argue that Malone was a better defender than Duncan is.

I'm not saying Malone was bad. He's just not Duncan.

He's not the shot blocker that Duncan was, but you're wrong to say Malone was not a great help defender...in fact that's one of the things that made him a very good defender...his only defeciency defensively was he wasn't a shot blocker like Duncan is and because of that I'd have to give the go ahead to Duncan as the superior defender.

To say Malone was not a good help defender is a woefully inaccurate and factually incorrect statement. Even his coaches expressed how good he was at that.

NBA Titles or no, Tony Parker has a looooooooooooooooooong way to go before he can be mentioned in the same breath as John Stockton.

I dont think he has as long of a way as you think. We can compare numbers for their first 3 years in the league and see how they stack up. It wont be pretty and its not in Stocktons favor.