The Karl Malone Thread

[nuraman00]

What do you think of Malone's turnover rate compared to other big men?

Forget about comparing Malone's turnover rate to other big men.

His TO% was lower than even the best PGs who have the lowest turnover rates!

Yes, he did average 3.1 turnovers per game, but then you have to take into account that he shot the ball more than others, so hence more opportunities to turn it over. Turnover rate normalizes it per possession. He probably shot or pass (used the ball) as as much or more than anyone, yet still turned it over less than the most protective PGs.

Comparing it to a few other bigs, there are other bigs that have comparable TO% (Malone's is still usually better), but again, he used the ball more than they did to. His per game is a little higher, but by about 0.5 turnovers, not a big deal IMO. Malone's is more impressive to me because of how often he had the ball.

 

[MHSL82]

Forget about comparing Malone's turnover rate to other big men.

His TO% was lower than even the best PGs who have the lowest turnover rates!

Yes, he did average 3.1 turnovers per game, but then you have to take into account that he shot the ball more than others, so hence more opportunities to turn it over. Turnover rate normalizes it per possession. He probably shot or pass (used the ball) as as much or more than anyone, yet still turned it over less than the most protective PGs.

Comparing it to a few other bigs, there are other bigs that have comparable TO% (Malone's is still usually better), but again, he used the ball more than they did to. His per game is a little higher, but by about 0.5 turnovers, not a big deal IMO. Malone's is more impressive to me because of how often he had the ball.

Interesting. Is there any way to figure out without going to play-by-plays of every game to know how many of them were offensive fouls? Not saying he's where Webber is in that category, just wondering. Malone, of course, got away with a lot of fouls, too.

Talking about getting away with fouls, I thought Malone got away with one in the Houston series when Stockton made his big shot.


I then read this in the comments, is this true?

"This is an inbounds play, therefore a player(back then) can keep two hands on a player and move with him(what Malone is doing) it's not setting a screen because clear possession isn't maintained. ONCE possession is maintained you can only make non moving picks for the ball handler. This was NOT an illegal screen...it was not even a screen. It was good offense free up by Malone."

 

[nuraman00]

Interesting. Is there any way to figure out without going to play-by-plays of every game to know how many of them were offensive fouls? Not saying he's where Webber is in that category, just wondering. Malone, of course, got away with a lot of fouls, too.

Talking about getting away with fouls, I thought Malone got away with one in the Houston series when Stockton made his big shot.


I then read this in the comments, is this true?

"This is an inbounds play, therefore a player(back then) can keep two hands on a player and move with him(what Malone is doing) it's not setting a screen because clear possession isn't maintained. ONCE possession is maintained you can only make non moving picks for the ball handler. This was NOT an illegal screen...it was not even a screen. It was good offense free up by Malone."

* I did not think Malone got away with one. I thought that was a good play.

* I do not know if any situation differentiating an inbounds play vs. a regular play, but I think I've seen two hands in a situation like that often, so it's probably true.

I agree it was barely a screen.

Here's a play where Webber freed up Bibby. There was more contact on this one. Webber didn't use his hands though, I don't think. Just his midsection.
[YOUTUBE]2i-dN7VEq4M[/YOUTUBE]


Here's a Webber game-typing 3-pointer. I don't think neither Webber nor Bibby set a screen on this play, but the action is similar. Go to 3:26.




Here's a Love 3-pointer. Minnesota runs one misdirection and Rubio screens out two guys. Does Rubio use two hands when doing that? I think so. Legal or not, it seems to happen.


* There was a game in 2003-2004, where Steve Nash set a screen on two players, Antione Walker dribbled around it, did a fancy dribbling move, and made a layup.

That was Dallas first win @ Lakers since 1990, a string of 26 straight losses. Also, the previous year during a Dallas @ Lakers game, Dallas had blown a 27 point 4th quarter lead.

 

[MHSL82]

* I did not think Malone got away with one. I thought that was a good play.

* I do not know if any situation differentiating an inbounds play vs. a regular play, but I think I've seen two hands in a situation like that often, so it's probably true.

I agree it was barely a screen.

Oh great, I was all ready to proceed in life with the rationalization that losing to Jordan in the second Finals was ok because Malone got away with one that put them in the first Finals. Now that Malone didn't get away with one, that leaves the Jordan push-off as an injustice - to go with the Eisley three that was taken away incorrectly and the Harper 2 that counted after the buzzer. They also didn't call a Pippen goal-tend in another game, the one Malone missed two free throws in. But since we didn't make the free throws, we deserved to lose.

I even tried to tell myself that the Jazz lost in seven, but then you told me how that wouldn't necessarily have happened. You are not helping my mental health by making me face reality that the Jazz may have lost something they could have won. Just tell me there was no way for them to win and I'll take the "good try" award home.

 

[nuraman00]

What did you think of the various plays, and how did they compare to the Malone one, in terms of screening?

 

[MHSL82]

What did you think of the various plays, and how did they compare to the Malone one, in terms of screening?

Some of them I had to watch a few times. I wish it were like Directv where I could fast-forward and rewind easily without it reloading or going back to some random spot near the mouse click. Like a seven second rewind or a 30 second skip. That would make YouTube so much better. Then, also, let us watch in slow-motion. I wonder if there are other players that do that and YouTube just needs to develop their own that doesn't violate patents or other intellectual property stuff - not that YouTube cares about copyright when I can watch What about Bob for free.

 

[MHSL82]

What did you think of the various plays, and how did they compare to the Malone one, in terms of screening?

Oops, I noticed that I was like Jim Harbaugh, I talked for awhile, but I didn't really say anything about what I was responding to. The Niners' coach is famous for this as he doesn't like the media. He views them as spies, critics, diabolical word-twisters, etc. He can be anywhere from dull as a human can be to dissuade questions or crazy so that no one really knows what he means or says.

 

[MHSL82]

What did you think of the various plays, and how did they compare to the Malone one, in terms of screening?

I perhaps should answer your question. I keep getting distracted by other things and somehow not getting around to what I thought about all those screens, holds, and good defense. It must be the time of day and sleep I get. You know? Those days where you just can't focus and by the time you do, it's time to go to sleep, but you don't want to. Yep. It's been one of those days.

 

[MHSL82]

What did you think of the various plays, and how did they compare to the Malone one, in terms of screening?

I think the Kevin Love one was annoying because I couldn't see it, or it was so far from the shot that it would have been funny to call because it had no affect on the play, IMO. The defender seemed content to go for the rebound after time expired. I seriously don't get why anyone got in position to rebound it. The game is expired! Everyone run at Love! He has no time to pass. Oh, the annoying part was his celebration - that was obnoxious to me.

I think the Webber-Bibby one was clever and effective. I don't know how I would guard that after I realized what was happening.

I think there was more contact with the first Bibby one, but there was some flopping going on. The other contact one seemed like an early box-out.

 

[Sackataters]

Some fans have all the luck. My father in law just attended a wedding with Karl Malone. All I have is direct tv and a view of the pine trees...and a lonely forum or two. Speaking of which, the ESPN one is radiator springs. Everyone is completely ambivalent...hard not to be lately, but a home stretch is on the horizon.

 

[HammerDown]

Karl Malone was here in Temecula at the construction site of a restaurant he was partners in. My buddy called me to come down there. The Mailman was easy to spot. Just wow.

 

[nuraman00]

Some fans have all the luck. My father in law just attended a wedding with Karl Malone. All I have is direct tv and a view of the pine trees...and a lonely forum or two. Speaking of which, the ESPN one is radiator springs. Everyone is completely ambivalent...hard not to be lately, but a home stretch is on the horizon.

I actually enjoy road games a little more, because I know they can win at home. They do every year.

But if they play decent on the road, then that's more encouraging.

 

[MHSL82]

Some fans have all the luck. My father in law just attended a wedding with Karl Malone. All I have is direct tv and a view of the pine trees...and a lonely forum or two. Speaking of which, the ESPN one is radiator springs. Everyone is completely ambivalent...hard not to be lately, but a home stretch is on the horizon.

What does this mean? I tried to figure it out from context of the rest of the post, but am not sure. Thanks.

 

[nuraman00]

Karl Malone was here in Temecula at the construction site of a restaurant he was partners in. My buddy called me to come down there. The Mailman was easy to spot. Just wow.

Nice story.

Thanks for sharing, Lakers32.

 

[MHSL82]

Speaking of Greg Miller, I wish he would channel some of his dads charisma. He seems like a complacent owner. He sits there and is not animated. I wouldn't want him to be Cuban like, but bark once in awhile to show the players who cuts the checks.

The only thing publicly that I've seen about Greg Miller was his spat with Malone. I don't think those two would work well together to say the least.

 

[MHSL82]

Oh, this is good too..

Check out this video on YouTube:

Gary Payton's Toughest Match-Up - YouTube

Thanks. Even though he was drunk, knowing his opinion based upon other statements made, this is reliable. He must have loved talking to Malone about Stockton when Malone went to the Lakers.

 

[MHSL82]

Is it really?

Yes, I'm talking about how PGs are valued and are given the respect. People want their PGs to score points or else they are minimized in the discussion. Even if not great, more so now than before. If Deron averaged 14 points and 2.5 more assists, I believe he would have had less attention despite contributing the same points.

Take away Stockton...

No, thank you.

[C]ompare 15 PGs from the modern era to the previous era, however you want to define it.

I also think if you score more than 20, you'll have more than 5 assists. Just because you're handling the ball so much, you'll get more than 5.

I forgot that you take things so literally. 5 assists to me means less than 10. I know it's rare, but I want a 8-10 apg PG. Deron was that. We might never have one, but that to me is the goal. It might not happen often, but if this weren't a scoring-oriented league, it would be more likely to happen. I say this because the PG who can score more will be chosen over the one who can get more assists. These aren't mutually exclusive, of course, but I'd be looking for the big assist guy. One caveat, though, you need a good system and teammates to get assists - so it is a bit of chicken and the egg, but it doesn't prevent having the pass first PG first.

To clarify, I wouldn't pass down a Deron type of scorer who had Deron's assists, too, but I would draft the best assist man I could who has vision, selflessness, etc., even if I doubted his scoring pedigree (though shooting percentage would be important). Hard to find, but possible to emphasize.

Here are all guards 6'3 or shorter who averaged more than 20 but less than 6 assists:

Player Season Finder | Basketball-Reference.com

Scanning the list, there's not many players.

* A rookie Kyrie Irving

* Monta Ellis, who shares the court with Curry and Lee (averages 3+ assists himself)

* Westbrook in one of his worst years, maybe it was the lockout. He had averaged 8+ assists the year before and the year after (this year).

* One year from Gilbert Arenas (it wasn't a recurring trend). He averaged 6-7 assists the following two years, then he got hurt and sucked. We'll never know what his production would have been like over a sustained period, since he was only good for a 3-4 year span. He also played with Butler and Hughes, players who averaged 3-4 assists themselves. My guess is that if you stuck Arenas with one-dimensional SF/SGs (who one couldn't run offense though), like Korver or Marvin Williams, then Arenas would have averaged 1.5 - 2 more assists.

* One year from Mike Bibby (they later got Artest and ran the offense through him, and he averaged averaged 4.2 assists, while Brad Miller averaged 4.7 assists, and the Kings ranked 5th in team assists, so they were getting a lot of assists from their system)

* Iverson (I was a little surprised at this one, but then I looked at his career. He started getting a lot more assists, 7+ for a few years, from 2003-2004 to 2007-2008, a span of 5 years. So those Philly teams earlier in his career were probably not that good offensively (and that's true, they had a washed up offensively Mutombo, and Eric Snow, and a young Raja Bell and young Harpring). When he had slightly better players like Van Horn and Webber and Iguodala, his assists went up. As well as those Denver teams, which were better offensively than those early Philly teams.)

* Sidney Moncrief, but he looks to be the PG in name only. Paul Pressey averaged 6-8 assists for those Bucks teams in all of the years that Moncrief played. So they appeared to run their offense through Pressey, even though he was a SG/SF.


So a lot of these players who averaged less than 6 assists appeared to have outlier seasons (Westbrook, Arenas). Or players who played with SF/SFs who the offense was run though more, thus diminishing the PG's responsibilities. Those SG/SFs (or C in the Brad Miller case) had the offense run through them. The PG didn't need to create every play, those other guys would do it about 1/2 the time too.

I have a feeling Batum this year averages 3+ assists, based on how I've seen him used. They run the offense through him in the post more. Let me check.

Ok, I looked it up, Batum averages 4.5 assists. I wonder if Lillard can average more than 8.2 assists if they keep Batum's role the same in future years. Not that I'm too concerned about their offense, they're 12th in offense and given their talent level that's pretty good, but 24th in defense and 18th in rebounding, so I would say they need their backcourt to rebound more, as they only combine for 6 boards a game, which is pathetic.

I think to understand my point of view, you have to understand my personality. Basketball-wise, I know I'm not sound. I like there to be an assist guy and a scorer. Stockton and Malone. I'm an individual guy, not so much a team guy. But rather than being an AI fan, my individual stat is assists. That's the type of PG I would be if I were to play. I'd be the passing QB, not the dual threat or running QB - even though I understand the benefit of being 2 dimensional.

Don't get me wrong, I'm a team guy when it comes to winning. The Jazz won because they were playing like a team. I think assists is the team-oriented stat. If you can get an assist, it involves others and may be contagious. If you score, it helps but people might start watching. So I guess, it's not just assists, it's distributing the ball.

It's a bit of a self-fulfilling prophecy. So I can't really say "getting assists is better" because that presumes points are scored. Whereas saying shoot-first implies that there are some misses. If you pass down shots that are open just to pass the ball, that could hurt your team if they don't score. Not passing up the shot would have been better. If you can't shoot or are unwilling, that hurts your team. So shooting well and opportunistically, is important.

 

[nuraman00]

So what I'm seeing is that you have PGs that averaged 10apg once or twice, but not more than that.

So if they did it once or twice, why couldn't they do it again?

I don't think it's because they changed their mentality. The PGs that could reach this, had to have been pass-first.

So there must be other factors that contributed to each unique case.

For example, with Jose Calderon, I've brought up his Assist % before, but I know you don't like it when I use that. But what I'm trying to show is that because his assist % is high, that he has the same mentality as other pass-first PGs. But his case, he's not able to get 10apg, partially because they have to take him off the floor for defense. He plays less minutes, because he's a defensive liability.

Calderon shoots even less than Stockton did, for example.

Mark Price and Terrell Brandon were other PGs who averaged a lot of assists, but not quite 10. Price only had 2 seasons with 9+, 9.1 and 10.4. And he shot about the same amount as Stockton. I think Price had the same kind of pass-first mentality, but just because he didn't average 10apg+, doesn't mean he was more of a shoot-first either.

With other players, maybe the team changed schemes a little, or brought in another player to run the offense through, such as a SG or SF.

Maybe those other teams took more 3's. The PG is the least likely to get an assist on a 3-pointer, unless it's a player that can hit 3's coming off screens (Ray Allen, Stojakovic, Reggie Miller, Korver). But most 3-point shooters are catch-and-shoot players. For those players, a big man or SF/SG is most likely to get an assist, because the ball was in the paint, and one of them kicked it back out to a 3-point shooter.

The Jazz rarely attempted 3's, ranking worse than 20s in most of the Stockton years (and many years in the 27-29 range).

The Spurs, meanwhile, attempt a lot of 3's, many years in the top 10.

Maybe the team is blowout out a lot of teams, and thus the PG plays less minutes. I've mentioned that the Jazz rarely had a top record in the Stockton years, which is partially why he or Malone didn't get more MVP consideration, and why Sloan didn't get more Coach Of The Year recognition.

So the Jazz were likely in closer games, and thus needed more from their PGs.

Chris Paul this year, for example, averages 3 less minutes than normal, and the Clippers have one of the best point-differentials, +9.6. A quick scan at the Jazz reveals they only had 7+ once, in 1997 (+9.6).

You also mentioned that the Jazz never had a legit backup for Stockton.

The Clippers have Bledsoe and Crawford, and soon Billups too, who can play PG.

Ok, Paul shoots a little more in the 4th, but that's because Griffin and Jordan can't be counted on, and they can't make FTs either, so Paul shooting is the best option for the way they run the team. Although I think a better coach could run different sets so other players could get good shots too. But those other players wouldn't create an assist for the PG in my way, it would be more about big to big passing, like Odom to Griffin. Just like Boozer to Noah or Noah to Boozer in Chicago.

That brings up another idea. What if the Jazz had two bigs that could pass to each other, like other teams have had (Grizzlies, Hawks, Bulls, Spurs with Duncan to Robinson, etc.)? That's just another way one could run the offense, rather than through the PG.

None of this is taking away from Stockton, but rather trying to examine why other PGs haven't done 10apg more often.

As this discussion is more about PGs in general.


And maybe it doesn't happen more often just because. I've mentioned that I don't think Tinsley could get 10apg even if he tried. When watching how the offense works, it just doesn't look like he could get that many, and he is averaging 5.25 FGAs in his 12 starts. So he's shooting even less than a Stockton, for example. With barely any FTAs either, lol.


So from my observations from watching other teams, sometimes I see PGs with a similar passing mentality, yet they still don't seem capable of averaging 10apg. And they're not shooting much either, about the same, or in Tinsley's case, less than a Stockton. I think some of it is about the Jazz schemes. (I don't think it's the same Flex offense as the Sloan one.) And maybe Hayward takes on more of a creator role than Hornacek.

So there must be other reasons why it's so hard to do. I've listed some possible ones. It could be a combination of a lot of things. I don't think teammates make that much of a difference, whether good ones or bad ones. But schemes do (such as having a SF/SF to run the offense through, instead of SG/SF/PF as finishers only).

So I don't think it's from a lack of trying to get assists, but for whatever reasons, it just doesn't seem to happen. Because I'm seeing PGs that don't shoot much, but also don't get 10apg either (while playing decent minutes), and I think they have the right mentality to try and get 10 apg.

Again, this post is more about whether PGs have the same mentality as other pass-first, and I think they do, even if they don't average 10apg. Because some of these guys, I think they're making the right decision, and also not shooting much, when I watch them play.

 

[MHSL82]

IMO, any of these league leading career stats, whether it's steals, rebounds, points, assists, 3's made, blocks, in order to get them, you have to play 19-21 seasons.

And you can't play 19-21 seasons, and be the best on your team at that stat for most of that time (steals, rebounds, points, assists, 3's made, blocks), and not be a winner. If you can play for that long, and be a starting caliber player for that long, and be that good at something, you'll be on a winning team.

There have been some guys that could lead the league in scoring for 2-3 years or be one of the top (McGrady, Stackhouse, Abdur-Rahim, Mullin, Al Jefferson) but they're not close to topping the career points. Not even Iverson, who is only 23rd on the leaderboard, and he did it for longer than the aforementioned.

So if one can have that long of a career, and do it for that long (likely 20-21 years), and be that healthy, the team will find a way to build a winner around you.

Or you'll end up on a team that can win.

Bryant just crossed 30K points, and he's likely 4 seasons away from breaking the record, and he's been in the league for his 17th year now. If someone can play for 20-21 years, they'll do more than "some" winning IMO, especially with how durable they had to have been.

And the same goes for those other stats too, even something like rebounds (if anyone ever comes close).

I have nothing to argue here, I don't know what I was talking about. I think I meant that I could see an emphasis on scoring helping, as opposed to just anything to win the game. Malone passed a lot when he could have forced some shots. Obviously, if he did that too long with no results, he'd be less likely to be kept for that long. I just saw a different emphasis and think points record could be broken.

 

[nuraman00]

Case in point, Karl Malone only needed to average 17.4 points for 84 more games (to match Abdul-Jabbar's game total) to pass Kareem. However, he didn't. The man of steel, the durable Malone averaged more points per game than Jabbar but couldn't pass him.

I still smile at this reference.

Great post, I love it.