PDA

View Full Version : Malone or Webber


Shaq Attack2
02-06-2004, 06:19 PM
There's a little discussion over at Lakerstalk about whether Webber is that much better than Malone currently. Both are going to be coming off knee injuries within a few weeks of each other this season. Both obviously play the same position and could very well meet in the playoffs this year.

So, assuming both Malone and Webber are at least as good as they were immediately preceding their injuries (meaning there aren't any lingering effects from their injuries), is Webber considerably better than Malone or is Malone still comparable to Webber? Is Webber a better jump shooter, passer, rebounder, or defender?

ReDIRKulous
02-06-2004, 06:48 PM
As of last season Webber was better imo...

Webber's stats would even be more inflated if he was on a weaker team like the Jazz as well.

In their primes it is obviously Malone though.

Chiwas
02-06-2004, 08:48 PM
Webber has been better all around the last years, however he has been injured 8 months without playing. Malone has been injured one month I think and he contributed a lot to keep the Lakers at the top for two months.

Malone will fit again quick while Webber is doubtful. Nonetheless he has 2-3 months to do it.

I think the key is going to be the teams themselves this time. The Kings are playing great without Webber and the Lakers have problems with the bunch of injuries.

I don't know how the Kings are going to respond when Webber plays regularly, but something is clear for me, Adelman will bench him if he doesn't improve even more the performance of the team.

With the Lakers is going to be other story, they will play Malone till he can't walk. If the Lakers resist without injuries and the Kings change the scheme to play for Webber as used to -which I doubt as I said-, I would bet for the Lakers.

On an isolated basis, Webber is better nowadays, thinking that he won't have physical problems again.

mavsfanforever
02-06-2004, 09:08 PM
People might think I am wrong but give Malone shooters like Peja, Bibby and Bobby and another passer like Vlade who understands the game and malone will average more assists than Webber. However due to age he might not score as much as webber does but IMO Malone is still much better than webber.

grndmstr_c
02-06-2004, 09:22 PM
I think you have to give the edge to Webber based on their pre-injury play. Webber scores more and is/was better at creating his own shot, but if you look at his performance last year he was pretty inefficient in doing so. Both have a rep as being able to shoot the midrange jumper, and to be fair both shoot it well enough that you should respect them at the elbows, but neither is going to be able to consistently beat you that way. Passing I give the slight edge to Malone. Webber's more likely to showboat, but my impression is that Malone is more substantively effective getting the ball to the right guy at the right time in the right spot. Malone's better defensively, Webber's better on the boards. It's Webber's more aggressive (though not necessarily consistent) low-post offense that tips the balance, IMO. He's the only one of the two that, before his injury at least, was still capable of putting his team on his shoulders.

LRB
02-06-2004, 09:22 PM
Webber is a girly-man and Malone is a thug's thug. Webber is afraid to go to the low post very much because he can't stand getting beat up. Malone only goes to the low post to bait someone into fouling him. Webber is injury prone. Malone is out with the only injury of his career due to a freak accident. When Webber get's upset he cries. When Malone gets upset he knocks the Sh!t out of you.

At this point in their careers Webber probably will get you the most points and rebounds over the course of a game. Malone is the more clutch player both offensively and defensively. Oh and Malone will know how many timeouts his team has at the end of the game.

mavsfanforever
02-06-2004, 09:39 PM
When it is last 2 minutes of the game Malone will not piss in his pants.

bernardos70
02-06-2004, 09:41 PM
I can't decide, Malone is better in some areas, Webber in others. But if the questions is "whether Webber is that much better than Malone currently," then no, he isn't that much better than Malone IMO.

MavKikiNYC
02-06-2004, 09:52 PM
Malone.

twelli
02-06-2004, 10:32 PM
I always wonder why some people get injured often and some stay healthy throughout their career. Is it bad luck? Is it smart/stupid play? Is it how to care take of one's body in general, in the off season, during the season, before and after the game and so on? I think Malone is a great example of staying fit, being strong while playing hard and with passion. I don't blame Webber for being injured, but two seasons in a row he has missed so many games. If he was afraid of going inside before his last injury I think he will be even more temptative when he comes back. I go with Malone till the end of the season despite his age.

ReDIRKulous
02-06-2004, 10:40 PM
I think Malone played more in control than Webber... and Malone doesn't try to be as flashy as Webber... remember.. last season Webber hurt himself trying to go for a lob dunk. When was the last time you saw Malone go for a lob dunk? Ever? I also think guys get hurt by having too much muscle on thei bodies. Your frame can't really handle it... especially on a running team like the Kings. Malone is muscualr... but I don't think as excessively as Webber.

grbh
02-06-2004, 10:46 PM
If both are healthy right now in Feb of 04 this isn;t even close. Webber without question,

Let's suppose for a moment that there was no salary cap, and both were healty.

How quickly would someone jump on giving up Malone for Webber.

sike
02-07-2004, 01:09 AM
Malone is a man
Webber is a shemale.....who would you choose????

mavsfanforever
02-07-2004, 01:50 AM
Malone would never be associated with the fanous timeout.

seelenjaeger
02-07-2004, 07:39 AM
Actually I think Walker is best of those three i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif

MavKikiNYC
02-07-2004, 10:36 AM
Originally posted by: ReDIRKulous
I think Malone played more in control than Webber... and Malone doesn't try to be as flashy as Webber... remember.. last season Webber hurt himself trying to go for a lob dunk. When was the last time you saw Malone go for a lob dunk? Ever? I also think guys get hurt by having too much muscle on thei bodies. Your frame can't really handle it... especially on a running team like the Kings. Malone is muscualr... but I don't think as excessively as Webber.

Malone isn't as muscular as Webber? Do you watch these games or listen to them on cassette?

ReDIRKulous
02-07-2004, 12:51 PM
They are both muscualr... obvioously... but I think Webber is more muscular.

I didn't say Malone WASN"T muscular... but I don't think Malone is quite as muscular as Webber. I saw Webber without a shirt on in a post game interview... the guy is built like the incredible Hulk. They are both muscular... but Webber is huge.. and Malone plays on the floor way more than Webber imo.

SaltwaterChaffy
02-07-2004, 01:06 PM
Malone's workout routine has become almost mythical in the NBA because he has been able to maintain such a beast of a body for over 15 years. I believe I read somewhere that he was hovering around 2% body fat at one point in his career. There's a difference between "strength" and muscle mass. Why do you think none of the body-builders are on ESPN's World Strongest Man competetions? They're usually dominated by guys who look kinda husky. If it comes down to muscle mass, Webber might have Malone beat, but I would guarantee that (probably now, definitely in his prime) Malone was a hell of a lot stronger than Webber.

ReDIRKulous
02-07-2004, 01:13 PM
I never said Webber was stronger than Malone.... I don't even know how you would determine that... I never said Webber was in better shape than Malone... all I am saying is that he appears to have more weight on his frame... which, imo leads to more injuries. I just don't understand why these guys pump so much iron to play basketball... Was Michael Jordan built like Arnold Shwartzenegger in his prime? Kareem abdul Jabbar? Tim Duncan? I think basketball palyers are at their best when they are more streamlined. I think Malone's size hurt him as a basketball player in a lot of ways too.

jayC
02-07-2004, 01:18 PM
Webber is still a top 8 player in the league. Hes got a nice baby hook, a great passer, and can nail the 18 footer every time. This isn't even a comparison.

LRB
02-07-2004, 01:22 PM
Originally posted by: ReDIRKulous
They are both muscualr... obvioously... but I think Webber is more muscular.

I didn't say Malone WASN"T muscular... but I don't think Malone is quite as muscular as Webber. I saw Webber without a shirt on in a post game interview... the guy is built like the incredible Hulk. They are both muscular... but Webber is huge.. and Malone plays on the floor way more than Webber imo.

Have you ever seen Malone with his shirt off?

Let's look at the facts. Webber is 6'10" tall and is listed at 245 lbs. Malone is 6'9" tall and is listed at 259 lbs. So malone clearly has more mass per inch being 1" shorter than Webber and 14 lbs heavier. Malone was listed at less than 3% body fat coming into this season. 3% of 259 lbs is 7.7 lbs which is less than the 14 lbs difference in Webber's and Malone's height. Therefore even if Webber is 0% body, and I highly doubt he's anywhere close to there, it would still be impossible to have more musle mass than Malone.

Malone is and has been throughout his career reguarded as on of the, if not the, strongest player in the NBA. After losing to the Jazz back in the late 90's Shaq admitted that Malone was even stronger than himself. Malone is famous for his fitness and superb muscular development.

Webber is a wuss. He's known as a wuss. And while he can overpower some weaker players, even players like Juwan Howard can eat his lunch phsyically. Webber might be above average, but Malone is at the top of the heap. i/expressions/rolleye.gif

LRB
02-07-2004, 01:23 PM
I think Malone's size hurt him as a basketball player in a lot of ways too.

And just how might that be?????

ReDIRKulous
02-07-2004, 01:50 PM
Originally posted by: LRB

Originally posted by: ReDIRKulous
They are both muscualr... obvioously... but I think Webber is more muscular.

I didn't say Malone WASN"T muscular... but I don't think Malone is quite as muscular as Webber. I saw Webber without a shirt on in a post game interview... the guy is built like the incredible Hulk. They are both muscular... but Webber is huge.. and Malone plays on the floor way more than Webber imo.

Have you ever seen Malone with his shirt off?

Let's look at the facts. Webber is 6'10" tall and is listed at 245 lbs. Malone is 6'9" tall and is listed at 259 lbs. So malone clearly has more mass per inch being 1" shorter than Webber and 14 lbs heavier. Malone was listed at less than 3% body fat coming into this season. 3% of 259 lbs is 7.7 lbs which is less than the 14 lbs difference in Webber's and Malone's height. Therefore even if Webber is 0% body, and I highly doubt he's anywhere close to there, it would still be impossible to have more musle mass than Malone.

Malone is and has been throughout his career regarded as on of the, if not the, strongest player in the NBA. After losing to the Jazz back in the late 90's Shaq admitted that Malone was even stronger than himself. Malone is famous for his fitness and superb muscular development.

Webber is a wuss. He's known as a wuss. And while he can overpower some weaker players, even players like Juwan Howard can eat his lunch phsyically. Webber might be above average, but Malone is at the top of the heap. i/expressions/rolleye.gif

I saw Malone in a wrestling thing with Dennis Rodman.. you could see his physique I don't think he had a shirt on.. or he had a tight tank top on or somehting. He didn't seem as bulky as Webber. Webber is built like an actual body builder. Malone is close tohugh... I never said Malone was a wimp or something. lol

LRB... do you know where this weight is distributed? Malone's over-all weight may be greater... but how do you know the bulk of that isn't on his lower body... and Webber's isn't on his upper body. Webber has said he has chicken legs. From what I have seen it appears that Webber is far more muscualr on his upper body than Malone. Anyway.. having more weight on your upper body would also cause more problems.... especially if your base is weaker.

ReDIRKulous
02-07-2004, 01:55 PM
Originally posted by: LRB

I think Malone's size hurt him as a basketball player in a lot of ways too.

And just how might that be?????

How do you think Jordan's game would have changed if he had put on 25 pounds of muscle when he was in his prime? I belive that excessive muscle slows you down and make you less agile and dexterious. It seems pretty simple to me... if you are a ballerina do you want to be built like Arnold Shwartzenegger? How do you think a lot of extra weight would affect a gymnast? Would Tim Duncan's game improve if he put on 50 pounds of muscle? I don't think so. I believe his effectiveeness would decrease and his injuries would increase. Especially in his joints.

LRB
02-07-2004, 03:15 PM
How do you think Jordan's game would have changed if he had put on 25 pounds of muscle when he was in his prime?

I think he would have went on to win 6 world championships, 6 finals MVP's, 5 regular season MVP's, a couple of all-star MVP's, lead the league in scoring several years, increased his vertical leap 4", and become regarded by most as the best player to have ever played the game of basket ball. Because Jordan did essentially put on 25 lbs of muscle in his prime.

Jordan entered the league right around 200. after advancing and getting physically beat up by the Pistons in the Playoffs for a couple of years, Jordan realized he needed more muscle. He bulked up to 216 while lowering his body fat from 8% to around 3%. That's almost right at 25 lbs of muscle.

Malone weight essentially 260 lbs is not carrying any real extra weight for a low post player. Especially if there is almost no fat. His is very porpotionally muscle throughout his body and even today is regarded as one of the most fit players in the game. Precious few players have played as long in years, games, or minutes as Malone has. There are only a couple of players who may have recieved more fouls than Malone. Up until this year when a freak acident injured his knee, he had missed less than a handful of games in almost 20 years.

It totally boggles my mind that anyone could make the statement that he would likely have been better with less muscle. It is almost assuredly because of his muscle that he was able to be so durable and have such a great career.

ReDIRKulous
02-07-2004, 03:19 PM
SO you are saying that if Jordan continued to put on weight his performance would increase with every pound no matter how much weight he gained?

I was talking about 25 pounds more than what he weighed in his prime -- additionally. I sure do have to spell a lot of things out for you LRB.

As I said before... his durability is more so due to his playing style... and his playing style was damaged by his weight/bulk.

Also... once again LRB... you fail to realize that while Malone had a great career he never won a championship... why is that? Could he have been better? I think so...

LRB
02-07-2004, 03:40 PM
Also... once again LRB... you fail to realize that while Malone had a great career he never won a championship... why is that? Could he have been better? I think so...


Yes he could have been better, but so could Jordan, Kareem, Magic, Bird, Russel, Chamberlain, any of the greats to play the game. That he didn't win a championship is due mainly to other great players primarily Jordan. Other than Stockton, Malone had precios little talent to surround him. Certainly didn't have Kareem, Magic, and Worthy level of talent nor a Jordan, Pippen, Rodman level. Winning championships takes a team. Jordan wouldn't have won without the right teammates to support him. No single individual has been good enough to win it on their own. Even Wilt the stat monster had to cut way back on his stats to win a championship so he could make it more of a team game.

And Jordan was at his peak stat wise when he bulked up. Look at this way, if Jordan hadn't but on the bulk he most likely wouldn't have won all those championships nor been as good a player. Jordan has said this himself.


As I said before... his durability is more so do to his playing style... and his playing style was damaged by his weight/bulk.

This is a ridiculous statement. Malone's style was based on his ability to overpower people both on offense and on defense. He wouldn't have been able to play the same style 25 lbs lighter. It widely attributed to his muscle mass that he lasted so long and was so successful. You are the single voice I have ever heard, and I've heard at least well into the hundreds, voice that Malone should have lost muscle to be more effective and last longer. Your factual evidence is weak almost to the point of being nonexistant while the factual evidence that it helped him be this good is overwhelming.

ReDIRKulous
02-07-2004, 03:58 PM
So, LRB... will a players game contnue to improve infinitely for each pound of muscle gained? You conveniently glossed over that point.

I also find it amusing that you are both arguing that Malone is incredibly muscular... more muscular than Webber... yet you claim Malone isn't overly muscular or slowed down by his muscles when it is obvious that Webber is clearly slowed down by his muscle mass.... you just don't know if you are coming or going do you.

dirno2000
02-07-2004, 04:30 PM
Malone isn't as muscular as Webber? Do you watch these games or listen to them on cassette?

Line of the week.


When it is last 2 minutes of the game Malone will not piss in his pants.

Malone is one of the worst clutch players in the history of the league. This isn't mentioned nearly enough.

Everybody likes to talk about the timeout without conceding that Webber led a team of freshmen then sophomores to the NCAA finals two straight years. Keep in mind that this was before the college game was watered down the way it is now..

Everybody points to the fact the Bibby took most of the big shots when the Kings almost upset the Lakers in the WCF. You never hear about how the "soft" Webber waved off Valde and took it upon himself to guard Shaq in the final minutes and in overtime of game seven.

A healthy Webber is one of the 5 or 6 best players in the league. That can't be said of a healthy 40 year old Malone.

LRB
02-07-2004, 08:30 PM
Originally posted by: ReDIRKulous
So, LRB... will a players game contnue to improve infinitely for each pound of muscle gained? You conveniently glossed over that point.

I also find it amusing that you are both arguing that Malone is incredibly muscular... more muscular than Webber... yet you claim Malone isn't overly muscular or slowed down by his muscles when it is obvious that Webber is clearly slowed down by his muscle mass.... you just don't know if you are coming or going do you.

Redirk as with everything, there can be too much of a good thing. So no a player won't continue to improve infinitely with each pound of muscle mass. However, considering his career accomplishments, Malone seems to be pretty damn close to optimum.

Webber is slowed down by being over muscular. He's slowed down by being less fit and not having enough muscle in the right places. You need a good balance. Or as a gym trainer told me once, "don't just do pecs, tri's and bi's". The other problem is that you can go for the showy muscles that stand out when people look at you, but don't give you the strength nor the muscle mass of someone doing workouts driven to achieve the last two goals and not the 1st. So someone can appear to be very muscular, but in reality not be near as muscular as they appear.

OutletPass
02-07-2004, 08:32 PM
Malone isn't as muscular as Webber? Do you watch these games or listen to them on cassette?
Total and absolute greatness !!! HOF material !!!
Mavskiki should have his keyboard hung in the rafters of the AAC when he quits posting !!!!!

sike
02-07-2004, 09:44 PM
Originally posted by: jayC
Webber is still a top 8 player in the league. Hes got a nice baby hook, a great passer, and can nail the 18 footer every time. This isn't even a comparison.
not so sure about top 10 jayC.....and I've seen him miss that freakin' 15-18 footer plenty.....
I guess to be honest, I dont like either....is that ok or does that make me a bad person....i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif

OzMavs
02-10-2004, 06:48 PM
http://i.cnn.net/si/2004/sioncampus/02/03/walton0205/lg_walton.jpg

Urgh.

grbh
02-10-2004, 08:48 PM
I'm sending that to BAd radio for gay or not gay

Shaq Attack2
02-10-2004, 09:55 PM
Webber is still a top 8 player in the league.

Has Webber ever in his entire life been a top 8 player? He's definitely not one now, certainly wasn't one last year.