# How good was Kevin McHale



## kisstherim (Jul 15, 2004)

what do u think of him?I personally rate he as TOP 5 PF ever.u know there r some awesome guys like Barkley,Tim Ducan,Karl Malone etc to compete for the TOP 3.anyway,McHale's amazing FGP made him highly competitive as well.

and u might argue he was not a PF.well,i know he could play C while Bird in PF,but in my memories,he played PF in most times.Correct me plz if i am wrong.


----------



## W1Z0C0Z (Jun 18, 2002)

I've heard many times that he's argueably the best post scorer of all time. I thought he was only like 6'8-9? One of the players I wish I was older to have been able to see play.


----------



## kisstherim (Jul 15, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>W1Z0C0Z</b>!
> I've heard many times that he's argueably the best post scorer of all time. I thought he was only like 6'8-9? One of the players I wish I was older to have been able to see play.


around 6-10


----------



## Kunlun (Jun 22, 2003)

All I know is that he rarely missed.


----------



## ssmokinjoe (Jul 5, 2003)

He perfected every low post move there was so that his defender never knew what was coming. He probably invented the up and under. Later in his career he began shooting 3s just to add another dimension to his already lethal arsenal. It was just sick watching him in the post. He could fake a guy out with all his up and unders, pump fakes, shoulder dips, etc until he ended up with an easy wide open shot.


----------



## Bad Bartons (Aug 23, 2002)

*Kevin McHale*

McHale was 6'10". But his unnaturally long arms made him more of a 7 footer. 

Some of his nicknames include:
The Torture Chamber because of his vast array of post moves. He would make defenders look foolish at times and if a guy kept his feet and didn't go for his fakes and footwork McHale would give him the fadeaway jumper that he released very high. It was unblockable.

The Black Hole because once he got the ball in the low post you might as well get back on defense. McHale in his early career rarely passed out of the post. But why should he? When he got the ball down there it was the best option his team had. 

Frankenstein... well, look at a picture of him and you will see a close resemblence to Frankenstein's Monster.

A case could be made that McHale was the best power forward of all time. He was a killer on offense, he was a great rebounder, his shot blocking ability and team defense made him an all NBA defender a few years and he was a WINNER.

He is among a very small group of power forwards that I have seen including Tim Duncan, Karl Malone and Charles Barkley. At the very least a top 3 power forward of all time.


----------



## agoo (Jun 1, 2003)

I think McHale is one of those underrated guys. He was a 6-10 PF, but he could scratch his knees without bending over, so he probably played taller than most 7-foot centers. He is the consensus best post player ever. His problem is that he was never the guy in Boston, and as such is probably somewhere between top five and top ten. If he had a team that was his own, then he would easily be top three and maybe the best ever. Because he was a part of the Big Three in Boston and second to Larry Legend, he isn't there. Of course, I don't think that McHale would have that any other way.


----------



## JRose5 (May 4, 2003)

*Re: Kevin McHale*



> Originally posted by <b>Bad Bartons</b>!
> 
> A case could be made that McHale was the best power forward of all time. He was a killer on offense, he was a great rebounder, his shot blocking ability and team defense made him an all NBA defender a few years and he was a WINNER.
> 
> He is among a very small group of power forwards that I have seen including Tim Duncan, Karl Malone and Charles Barkley. At the very least a top 3 power forward of all time.



:yes: 
That about sums it up.


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

*Re: Kevin McHale*



> Originally posted by <b>Bad Bartons</b>!
> McHale was 6'10". But his unnaturally long arms made him more of a 7 footer.
> 
> Some of his nicknames include:
> ...


good post, but i'm not sure how you could list duncan, malone and barkley and then say mchale is at the very least top 3. those 3, along with hayes, pettit, baylor (if you count him as a 4) and garnett all could be argued above mchale. of course, arguments could be made for mchale as well.

he was a superb low-post player. an excellent defender, and a pretty good rebounder. he was among the best ever. his peak was a bit limited - about '85-'90.


----------



## ChiBron (Jun 24, 2002)

I don't get these poll options. *Top 5 ever and Top 10 ever* have recieved the most votes. Is that supposed to be for PFs only or do people really think he's a top 10 player of all time?


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>agoo101284</b>!
> I think McHale is one of those underrated guys. He was a 6-10 PF, but he could scratch his knees without bending over, so he probably played taller than most 7-foot centers. He is the consensus best post player ever. His problem is that he was never the guy in Boston, and as such is probably somewhere between top five and top ten. If he had a team that was his own, then he would easily be top three and maybe the best ever. Because he was a part of the Big Three in Boston and second to Larry Legend, he isn't there. Of course, I don't think that McHale would have that any other way.


i personally don't think he had the overall game to be as domimant as a lone star. i think his deficiencies would have come more to the forefront. he wasn't a good passer, and his offensive game wasn't that diverse outside the post (although he was a good shooter) or dynamic. he wasn't a great rebounder. he didn't have tremendous strength or athleticism. i don't think he's a guy whose numbers would have skyrocketed outside of boston, because he would have had alot more focus on him. what he was was a tremendously effecient player, and that adds a tremendous luxury to any team.


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>SPMJ</b>!
> I don't get these poll options. *Top 5 ever and Top 10 ever* have recieved the most votes. Is that supposed to be for PFs only or do people really think he's a top 10 player of all time?


i'm reading it to be pf's only. seems clear in the context.


----------



## Pioneer10 (Sep 30, 2004)

Agree with a lot of previous posts. Mchale was a freak inside: tall, gangly, and those too long for his body arms. It's hard to rate how good this guy really was. The same thing with his counterpart on the Lakers, Worthy. When I rewatched some of those old series it's remarkable how good these guys where but they both were overshadowed by their more famous teammates. Plus, McHale's career was cut short by injury.

Today, I kind of think of Duncan with his post moves is the ultimate version of Mchale. Athletic, long, a little more muscle


----------



## CrossOver (May 19, 2003)

McHale story:

During the first couple of years the Heat started playing, I used to be able to get 5th row tickets from a friend I played basketball with. He couldn't make alot of the games so I was always going to the Miami Arena. The night the Celtics were in town, I took my old man since he had always liked the Celtics in the Celtics/Lakers matchups.

Well, we get there pretty early and who do we see shooting free throws by himself? Kevin McHale, that's who. Anyways he is shooting free throws for about 20 minutes and hitting nothing but net. I don't recall seeing him miss even one. One of the shots curls the net over the rim. I'm thinking, damn I hate when that happens because I have to get a running jump to pull it down. At the time, I could only touch the rim, so when the net would get curled up I would challenge myself to pull it down on my own.

Funny thing is, McHale casually walks up to the rim, reaches straight up, mind you his arms went on forever, and casually pulls down the net withouth even getting on his tip-toes. I looked over to my dad and we both were laughing at how easily someone could do that. We started yelling to McHale how his arms were as long as his legs. He even smiled at us for trying to "heckle" him even though it was all in good fun.

McHale went on to score 20+ points that night. He dominated Miami's front line which back then consisted of Rony Seikaly, Grant Long and a few scrubs like Alec Kessler!


----------



## Pan Mengtu (Jun 18, 2004)

Not as good as his protégé, Kevin Garnett.


----------



## speedythief (Jul 16, 2003)

Isiah Thomas was once asked who he would prefer to have--reigning MVP Tim Duncan, or Kevin McHale. Thomas picked McHale. What's funny is that some people consider Duncan a top-10 player of all time but few consider McHale.

A good poll might be Kevin McHale vs. Karl Malone.


----------



## Pan Mengtu (Jun 18, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>speedythief</b>!
> Isiah Thomas was once asked who he would prefer to have--reigning MVP Tim Duncan, or Kevin McHale. Thomas picked McHale. What's funny is that some people consider Duncan a top-10 player of all time but few consider McHale.
> 
> A good poll might be Kevin McHale vs. Karl Malone.


I think that more accurately reflects Isiah Thomas the GM. What a great track record he has for picking the best players, right?


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

Top ten but nearly top five...behind Karl Malone, Charles Barkley, Tim Duncan, Kevin Garnett and Bob Pettite. Around the same class as Elvin Hayes.

Elgin Baylor I consider a small forward.


----------



## Bad Bartons (Aug 23, 2002)

*Re: Re: Kevin McHale*



> Originally posted by <b>kflo</b>!
> 
> 
> good post, but i'm not sure how you could list duncan, malone and barkley and then say mchale is at the very least top 3. those 3, along with hayes, pettit, baylor (if you count him as a 4) .


Actually, I am just saying that everyone should consider him at least top three but a case could be made that any of those 4 are in that top three.

I am biased but I think the best I have seen are Duncan and McHale with no particular order. Malone is a very close third with Barkley at 4.


----------



## Bad Bartons (Aug 23, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>CrossOver</b>!
> McHale story:
> 
> During the first couple of years the Heat started playing, I used to be able to get 5th row tickets from a friend I played basketball with. He couldn't make alot of the games so I was always going to the Miami Arena. The night the Celtics were in town, I took my old man since he had always liked the Celtics in the Celtics/Lakers matchups.
> ...


Great story!!!!!!!

Thank you.


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Minstrel</b>!
> Top ten but nearly top five...behind Karl Malone, Charles Barkley, Tim Duncan, Kevin Garnett and Bob Pettite. Around the same class as Elvin Hayes.
> 
> Elgin Baylor I consider a small forward.


That's the thing about McHale. In talent alone he would be #2 PF all-time (behind Malone). McHale was the best post player i have ever seen. Sure he wouldn't block as many as Nance, nor score as many as Karl, nor rebound as many as Chuck, but he was uterly (sp?) unstopable in the paint. 

McHale, had he been the franchise player for any team wouldn't have any trouble (injuries aside) to average 30-10-2bpg. That's a whole lot more than you could ever get from Chuck, KG, TD or Pettite. 

Maybe i'm being a little heretic (sp?) here, but in his prime McHale was better than any other PF in history not named Karl Malone.


----------



## TheRifleman (May 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>W1Z0C0Z</b>!
> I've heard many times that he's argueably the best post scorer of all time. I thought he was only like 6'8-9? One of the players I wish I was older to have been able to see play.


McHale was a bona fide 6'10" and he "invented" the low & high posts moves you saw Hakeem doing. (Hakeem learned them while playing against McHale in the '86 finals.) Some of us called him the <b>"Man of 1001 post moves"</b>.

I can easily get Kevin into the top 10 PF's of all time. Isiah Thomas, Jordan, and Barkley all say he was one of the toughest defenders they ever faced. In fact, Barkley says he was the toughest defender he ever faced.

Bob Pettit, Barkley, The big "E", deBusschere, Karl Malone, Tim Duncan, Paul Silas, Tommy Heinsohn, McHale, and big game James Worthy can be the top 10, imo.


----------



## LOYALTY (May 23, 2003)

*He was on a team that fit him*

He was definitely a very fundamentally sound player.. and he fit ferfectly with the other Boston players. He would have been an all-star anywhere, but I can't see him winning championships without the great team around him. (but you can say that about any star player)

McHale had a great hook shot. Once you adjusted to that, he faked the hook and ducked under you for a layup. He could get any defender off his feet, and he used those long arms and good foot moves perfectly. I give him major props, and this is coming from someone who could not Stand the Celtics..


----------



## John (Jun 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>kflo</b>!
> 
> 
> i personally don't think he had the overall game to be as domimant as a lone star. i think his deficiencies would have come more to the forefront. he wasn't a good passer, and his offensive game wasn't that diverse outside the post (although he was a good shooter) or dynamic. he wasn't a great rebounder. he didn't have tremendous strength or athleticism. i don't think he's a guy whose numbers would have skyrocketed outside of boston, because he would have had alot more focus on him. what he was was a tremendously effecient player, and that adds a tremendous luxury to any team.


Agree, we never know how a player plays if he is playing on a one man team.

Just like if Vince Carter was playing with Shaq early in his career, we are seeing Carter with 3-4 highlight dunks!


----------



## Midnight_Marauder (Dec 1, 2003)

When I was younger my dad used to make me watch Kevin Mchale do post up moves...He was amazing....if he got the ball underneath it was almost automatic


----------



## Drewbs (Feb 16, 2004)

His footwork was great as well. The guy is all over the painted area with the ball and almost never travels.


----------



## 1 Penny (Jul 11, 2003)

Every time i hear the name Kevin McHale.

The one thing that comes to mind is Post player. The guy may not be as atheletic nor as skilled as most superstar from the past and today. But damn, he was a freak when it comes down to mastering the post game. He is "automatic" down the post, he hardly misses down there. 

Its like when he has the ball down the post, as if the ball is magnetized by the ring. If you think Tim Duncan is one of the best players to ever used the board to score... you have not seen McHale.


----------



## kisstherim (Jul 15, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>SPMJ</b>!
> I don't get these poll options. *Top 5 ever and Top 10 ever* have recieved the most votes. Is that supposed to be for PFs only or do people really think he's a top 10 player of all time?


for PFs only

sorry,my bad.


----------



## Bad Bartons (Aug 23, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>PauloCatarino</b>!
> 
> 
> That's the thing about McHale. In talent alone he would be #2 PF all-time (behind Malone). McHale was the best post player i have ever seen. Sure he wouldn't block as many as Nance, nor score as many as Karl, nor rebound as many as Chuck, but he was uterly (sp?) unstopable in the paint.
> ...


It shows the greatness of McHale when a Laker fan gives him such props. Thank you for appreciating an opposing teams' talents.


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>PauloCatarino</b>!
> 
> 
> That's the thing about McHale. In talent alone he would be #2 PF all-time (behind Malone). McHale was the best post player i have ever seen. Sure he wouldn't block as many as Nance, nor score as many as Karl, nor rebound as many as Chuck, but he was uterly (sp?) unstopable in the paint.
> ...


there's just no way i'd take mchale over duncan. 

i don't think mchale was a 30 ppg guy as a franchise player. he was truly an awesome post player, but i don't think he was dynamic enough on his own to put up 30 a game with nearly the same efficiency. 

bird missed almost the entire '89 season. mchale's scoring didn't budge (22.5), although his ppfga went down.


----------



## Nate505 (Aug 22, 2003)

*Re: Re: Re: Kevin McHale*



> Originally posted by <b>Bad Bartons</b>!
> 
> 
> Actually, I am just saying that everyone should consider him at least top three but a case could be made that any of those 4 are in that top three.
> ...


Malone was eons better than McHale. McHale was a great PF, and a worthy hall of famer, but Malone defined the position. Except maybe for post moves, I can't think of one thing that McHale did better than Malone, while Malone did a lot of things better than McHale.


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>kflo</b>!
> 
> 
> there's just no way i'd take mchale over duncan.
> ...


Check out his 86-87 season, kflo: 26.1ppg *on .604FG%!!!!*, 9.9rpg, 2.6apg and 2.23bpg... 
In that year Bird was averaging 28.1ppg, 9.2rpg and Parish 17.5 - 10.6.

McHale put up amazing stats. And if one remembers the company he played with, those stats become humongous, IMHO...


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Bad Bartons</b>!
> 
> 
> It shows the greatness of McHale when a Laker fan gives him such props. Thank you for appreciating an opposing teams' talents.


The players that inspirated (sp?) me more when i was a kid and starting to play bball was Magic's passing and court vision, Larry's shooting and - you guessed it- Kevin McHale's post moves...

(off course, i could never copycat Kevin's footwork, but i did deliver twice the infamous "McHale's clotheline (sp?)" (remember Rambis?)


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>PauloCatarino</b>!
> 
> 
> Check out his 86-87 season, kflo: 26.1ppg *on .604FG%!!!!*, 9.9rpg, 2.6apg and 2.23bpg...
> ...


those stats are humongous. 

check out barkley's '88 season - 28.3, 1.331 ppfga (mchale was at 1.310 in '87), 11.9 rpg, 3.2 apg, 100 stls, 103 blks.

mchale was aided by playing with the players he played with as well. double teams were difficult because teams had to pick their poison. bird ran the show there in many ways. i don't think if you take mchale away from that situation his numbers skyrocket - i think it becomes a bigger challenge for him. mchale certainly was a great player - i have nothing but praise for him as a player - i just think that he's a notch below a select few other guys overall - duncan for sure.


----------



## rainman (Jul 15, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>TheRifleman</b>!
> 
> 
> McHale was a bona fide 6'10" and he "invented" the low & high posts moves you saw Hakeem doing. (Hakeem learned them while playing against McHale in the '86 finals.) Some of us called him the <b>"Man of 1001 post moves"</b>.
> ...


ah, music to my ears when you mention guys like the big e,pettit and debusschere, i think if you look at mchale for a 3 or 4 year period, 83-87 then an argument could be made he was the greatest at the 4 spot. over a longer period i would say others would win out.


----------



## PauloCatarino (May 31, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>kflo</b>!
> 
> 
> those stats are humongous.
> ...


I loved Chuck. He was awesome.
But not even him can come close to McHale when it comes to low post mastery. Chuck had two go-to moves: the jump-shot and the dunk. McHale had dozens...



> mchale was aided by playing with the players he played with as well. double teams were difficult because teams had to pick their poison. bird ran the show there in many ways. i don't think if you take mchale away from that situation his numbers skyrocket - i think it becomes a bigger challenge for him. mchale certainly was a great player - i have nothing but praise for him as a player - i just think that he's a notch below a select few other guys overall - duncan for sure.


I'm not saying his numbers would skyrocket. i said a 30-10-2bpg scenario would be very much possible. that's certainly much more than most of today's PF could ever dream of... and thinking that Kevin could average that while shooting over .530FG% is... i don't know... ridiculous?


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>PauloCatarino</b>!
> 
> 
> I loved Chuck. He was awesome.
> But not even him can come close to McHale when it comes to low post mastery. Chuck had two go-to moves: the jump-shot and the dunk. McHale had dozens...


i said look at the numbers (not the number of moves) - barkley was more productive AND more efficient. 

mchale brought alot of great things to the table for a great team though. 



> Originally posted by <b>PauloCatarino</b>!
> 
> I'm not saying his numbers would skyrocket. i said a 30-10-2bpg scenario would be very much possible. that's certainly much more than most of today's PF could ever dream of... and thinking that Kevin could average that while shooting over .530FG% is... i don't know... ridiculous?


i don't see him as a 30 ppg scorer. he could be contained with a double because he wasn't overwhelming, and because he wasn't a good passer. 

again, the '89 season saw his scoring stay at 22.5 ppg, while his fg% went down from 60.4% to 54.6% (of course, not too shabby). without bird, things didn't just open up for him, they closed down. he just couldn't create opportunities for himself that would translate into 30+ ppg as a lead guy, imo. he just wasn't a dynamic player. he was an efficient scoring machine, but he had his limitations.


----------



## Bad Bartons (Aug 23, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: Kevin McHale*



> Originally posted by <b>Nate505</b>!
> 
> Malone was eons better than McHale. McHale was a great PF, and a worthy hall of famer, but Malone defined the position. Except maybe for post moves, I can't think of one thing that McHale did better than Malone, while Malone did a lot of things better than McHale.


I'll tell you what McHale did better than Karl Malone:

WIN NBA CHAMPIONSHIPS!!!!

If Malone could have lead his team to a championship he would be the greatest or at very least 2 behind Duncan.

The goal of the game still is winning. Many players are not considered the best unless they can get a ring. Malone had his chances and did not win the big one. Duncan did. McHale did.


----------



## Nate505 (Aug 22, 2003)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Kevin McHale*



> Originally posted by <b>Bad Bartons</b>!
> 
> 
> I'll tell you what McHale did better than Karl Malone:
> ...


Oh yeah, McHale carried those Celtics teams. It's not like he had any help. It's not like the C's had centers that were eon's better than any center on the Jazz roster at the time, or a very deep bench, or some small forward who won multiple MVP's or a quality backcourt or anything like that.



> If Malone could have lead his team to a championship he would be the greatest or at very least 2 behind Duncan.
> 
> The goal of the game still is winning. Many players are not considered the best unless they can get a ring. Malone had his chances and did not win the big one. Duncan did. McHale did.


Rings alone is an inane argument. Chauncey Billups was an integral part of a championship team, yet hardly anyone would argue that he was better than John Stockton or Gary Payton or Jason Kidd. Nobody is anointing Billups to be the among the best who's ever played the point, or even a serious HOF candidate at this point in his career.


----------



## Bad Bartons (Aug 23, 2002)

*Championships mean alot in a player's career...*

and his place in history.

Yes, McHale had help in being a part of championship teams but the fact remains: McHale was a champion.

Malone played on some great teams that were worthy of winning the championship they just could not get it done.

You made a comment that "Karl Malone was eons better than McHale", and other than post moves you could not think of one thing that McHale did better than Malone. McHale still has something that Malone does not: an NBA Championship.

I am just here to remind you that Malone has a huge flaw in his career: he has never won an NBA Championship. He realizes that his career is not truly complete without that ring, that is why he went to LA last year.

Malone is a great player and at least top 3 among power forwards all-time but I would not say that he was eons better than McHale.

Look, I am not going to say that McHale was better than Malone. But a case could be made that he was and a huge part of that case would be that McHale knew how to play team basketball and he was great at helping his team in the clutch. He was a big reason that the Celtics won NBA Championships.


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

*Re: Championships mean alot in a player's career...*



> Originally posted by <b>Bad Bartons</b>!
> and his place in history.
> 
> Yes, McHale had help in being a part of championship teams but the fact remains: McHale was a champion.
> ...


he did come off the bench for 2 of the 3 championships. he was a bit player in '81, and in '84 he was a low teen's scorer in the playoffs and finals.

he was great in '86.

he was clutch, but he had the luxury of being the 2nd option in the clutch. malone had no such luxury.


----------



## Bad Bartons (Aug 23, 2002)

He came off the bench because the Celtics had a vet at forward (Cedric "Cornbread" Maxwell). I would not call him a "bit" player in '81. He was a very important part of that team even though his stats may not reflect it. 

As far as coming off the bench, he was the clear Sixth Man of the Year in '84. He was one of the best players on the floor.

He was awesome in '86. That was one of the greatest teams of all time.

Look, I am not going to get into a heated debate of "McHale was better than Malone". If you look at Malone's stats vs. McHale's Karl is the clear favorite in most categories. Karl Malone was great. However, I think that McHale's greatness is often overlooked because of Bird and because he sacrificed his statistics in order to be a part of great winning teams.

Karl's stats overshadow McHale's. However, Championships must be a large factor in terms of player greatness. McHale has them, as does Duncan. In discussing Malone's greatness the only flaw is the lack of a Ring.


----------



## kflo (Jun 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Bad Bartons</b>!
> He came off the bench because the Celtics had a vet at forward (Cedric "Cornbread" Maxwell). I would not call him a "bit" player in '81. He was a very important part of that team even though his stats may not reflect it.


he played 17 mpg in the playoffs (down from 20 in the regular season), and 14 mpg in the finals (4.7 ppg, 39% fg%). you wouldn't call him a bit player? he certainly wasn't a major contributor to the championship.




> Originally posted by <b>Bad Bartons</b>!
> 
> As far as coming off the bench, he was the clear Sixth Man of the Year in '84. He was one of the best players on the floor.


in '84, he scored 14.8 ppg in the playoffs, 13.4 in the finals (45% fg%). 



> Originally posted by <b>Bad Bartons</b>!
> He was awesome in '86. That was one of the greatest teams of all time.


certainly 



> Originally posted by <b>Bad Bartons</b>!
> Look, I am not going to get into a heated debate of "McHale was better than Malone". If you look at Malone's stats vs. McHale's Karl is the clear favorite in most categories. Karl Malone was great. However, I think that McHale's greatness is often overlooked because of Bird and because he sacrificed his statistics in order to be a part of great winning teams.
> 
> Karl's stats overshadow McHale's. However, Championships must be a large factor in terms of player greatness. McHale has them, as does Duncan. In discussing Malone's greatness the only flaw is the lack of a Ring.


i agree that championships play a role. i'm a believer in that. i think it's easier to use championships when other factors are closer, or when roles and responsibilities are closer. the bigger the difference in roles and responsibilities, and in production, the less clear it becomes.

i'm not comparing malone to mchale here either, btw. just pointing out the danger in just saying the big differentiator is championships. 

big props to mchale's play in '86. it really launched him to the next level, which he maintained in '87 - afterwhich he really never got back to that level of dominance (although he did have a huge playoffs in '88).

one question i ask myself typically when comparing players with championships to players without championships is whether i think the player without the championships could have realistically stepped into the other players shoes and been equally successful. in the cases of '81 and '84, malone, i think, certainly could have filled mchales shoes. '86 is alot more debatable.


----------



## Pioneer10 (Sep 30, 2004)

I agree with Kflo that is difficult to compare players when they aren't the number one options. I believe both Mchale and Malone were outstanding weapons and terrific players. Because Mchale was the Number 2 guy in Boston (just like Worthy on the Lakers) he definitely benefited. On the other hand they will also be forever shortchanged a bit no matter how good or how well they performed in the playoffs because they were the number 2 options on both teams. Malone was the number one option on his team and we simply don't know how well he would have played with a Bird or Magic on his team. Stockton, for as good a player as he was, is not in the same caliber as these guys and Malone played well enough to get his teams to two finals

When using championships as in indicator (which I agree should be the defining measure of the truly great players) it would be much easier comparing Malone to another number one option like Duncan. Here I have argued in another thread Malone for all his great stats might not measure up as well because of his lack of winning a title


----------



## Nate505 (Aug 22, 2003)

*Re: Championships mean alot in a player's career...*



> Originally posted by <b>Bad Bartons</b>!
> and his place in history.
> 
> Yes, McHale had help in being a part of championship teams but the fact remains: McHale was a champion.


So were Will Purdue and Scott Hastings. That hardly puts them in the calibar of elite players who never won rings.



> Malone played on some great teams that were worthy of winning the championship they just could not get it done.
> 
> You made a comment that "Karl Malone was eons better than McHale", and other than post moves you could not think of one thing that McHale did better than Malone. McHale still has something that Malone does not: an NBA Championship.


Championships are not individual achievements. They are team achievements. Utah never had teams that were worthy of winning championships. Hell, I'm amazed that they made it to the Finals with the teams they had. Other than Hornacek (and Stockton obviously), most of the players on the Jazz roster were scrubs. It's no shock that Russell, Eisley, and Anderson have had mediocre careers after leaving Utah. 



> Malone is a great player and at least top 3 among power forwards all-time but I would not say that he was eons better than McHale.


I would. His was a much more dominant scorer, rebounder, passer, and defender.


----------



## Bad Bartons (Aug 23, 2002)

*Re: Re: Championships mean alot in a player's career...*



> Originally posted by <b>Nate505</b>!
> 
> So were Will Purdue and Scott Hastings. That hardly puts them in the calibar of elite players who never won rings.
> 
> ...


McHale is so far above Purdue and Hastings that I will not waste time and energy going into that argument.

Championships are not individual achievements, true. But when assessing a players greatness and their place among great players in their position it has to be a large factor. It is the same in every sport. The goal is winning. Players who are borderline hall of famers on winning teams get in when those on losing teams do not. You may not want to believe that winning a championship should be such a large factor. Karl Malone knows it is a large factor in his place in history. That is why he left Utah to get what he thought would be a championship in LA.

Still, we entered this argument because we disagree on whether Malone is "eons" better than McHale. I think Malone may be better just not eons.

I stand by my original statement that McHale fits in with the top 4 power forwards that I have seen: Duncan, Malone, Barkley and McHale. Garnett is right there too. There is a drop off after those 5. I do not think that any of these 5 is "eons" better than the rest.


----------

