Greatest power forwards of all time

[theceltsauerbach]

 Bob Pettit is the greatest power forward of all-time, IMO.

[CelticG1]

It's probably a straw man argument because Garnett wouldn't have gotten away with a lot of his antics in that era.  Garnett is intense but he is relatively soft as a player.  An Oakley, Barkley, Malone, Lucas, etc would have clothslined him after a chest pounding or trash talking....Back when the NBA's players were allowed to police themselves.

A very good point. The tough guy/intimidation/psych game is mostly a show in today's game.  In the 80's, fights didn't even necessitate ejections, technicals, or sometimes even foul shots.  Mass of players grabbing, pushing, and hitting?  Break it up, a big warning, then a side-out.  Bill Laimbeer would have thrown KG on the ground.  Simple as that.

Which is part of why it's hard to compare players across eras like this.  How can wing players and PGs today (with the hand-check rule) be compared to the 80's guys, and even more the 70's teams (that were sometimes half-schnockered during games...the paint was a 48-minute bar fight!).

Exactly it is very difficult to compare the era. Bill Laimbeer probably weighs twice as much as KG does. To be honest if the guys in the NBA now played then and were allowed to get awaay with fighting and antics, the modern day players would absolutely destroy those guys in the 80's. I'm sorry but the amount of training, lifting, dieting that these guys do today I'm pretty sure they would be able to handle those 80's guys as a whole.

On a side note where do people get the idea that KG backs down from other guys?

[Boris Badenov]

How many championships would the 1980s C's have one with Garnett in his prime vs. McHale in his prime?

Maybe I'm crazy, but I think the Garnett version would have won more. The rest of the C's easily had enough offensive firepower to make up for McHale's absence, the defense would have been better, and their intensity and will to win would have been much, much higher.

Their intensity and will to win would have been higher?  Are you kidding, Boris?  Did you watch Bird play?  Bird's intensity and will to win is pretty much unsurpassed in any era. You could make a case that we'd have won as many titles in that era.  But not more.  This was Bird's team.  Parish's defense.  Garnett would have been a great role player ala McHale.  The only time Garnett would have led those Celtics is when Bird was injured.

Since Bird was less demonstrative there might be a perception by people who didn't watch him much that he wasn't as intense.  Bird didn't headbutt any stantions or pound his chest.  He didn't have to.

I was around then - I grew up with that 1980s team. I was comparing KG's drive to McHale's, not to Bird's. That would be silly.

But if you're saying that a team's competitiveness depends only on the competitiveness of its best player and not on the will to win of anyone else, well, then I disagree.

And I also think that of that starting five, McHale was the least tenacious. When Bird called his teammates sissies, we all knew who he meant. (Luckily, so did McHale!).

LOL...McHale sure didn't look like a sissy when he clothslined Rambis....Although he did after!

He clotheslined Rambis one game after, and many people believe because, Bird called the team sissies. I think this helps my argument!

On the other point, I do wonder whether Garnett would be more physical if he played under the old rules - or whether he wouldn't be able to hang with the true tough guys of that era. I think it's debatable, but I lean toward thinking he would have adjusted to that era just fine.

[Celtics17]

Today's players would destroy the 80's players huh? Yeah, that is the argument that most generations make against ones they didn't live in. It's the same story. Shaq is better then Wilt, Michael better then Oscar, Lebron better then Bird and here I am reading that the 80's C's would have won more titles with an 'in his prime KG then McHale".

Well, it's always a hard call to make. Let me ask this, would an 'in his prime KG be able to guard McHale? No is my answer and I mean that emphatically. You could make a very good argument that in 86 when the C's won the title that McHale could have easily been the leagues' MVP if he hadn't been somewhat injured. I love KG and think he is one of the best defensive players I have ever seen. That being said, I dont think he is a better power forward then McHale was.

[indeedproceed]

Today's players would destroy the 80's players huh? Yeah, that is the argument that most generations make against ones they didn't live in. It's the same story. Shaq is better then Wilt, Michael better then Oscar, Lebron better then Bird and here I am reading that the 80's C's would have won more titles with an 'in his prime KG then McHale".

Well, it's always a hard call to make. Let me ask this, would an 'in his prime KG be able to guard McHale? No is my answer and I mean that emphatically. You could make a very good argument that in 86 when the C's won the title that McHale could have easily been the leagues' MVP if he hadn't been somewhat injured. I love KG and think he is one of the best defensive players I have ever seen. That being said, I dont think he is a better power forward then McHale was.

That in a lot of ways sums up the fun and the frustration of these kinds of debates.

I hate when people say things like "Kwame Brown's athleticism would've taken the NBA by storm in the 1950's. He would've been a HOF'er."

Because, that's true, without context. Kwame has had better training, the experience of what works and what doesn't when developing a basketball player from age 11, better medical technologies, all that.

So yes, putting Kwame Brown in the middle of 1950's and 1960's NBA would be like sending the terminator back to 1990. He would dominate.

But, that's only giving one guy in the equation the benefits of modern training and technology, which is ridiculous.

You can only compare guys in the context of their own period. In that regard, saying Kevin McHale, the guy who is acknowledged to at worst be the 2nd most talented offensive post player of the modern era (some rank him behind Hakeem) would still be able to score on KG I think is fair.

It is also fair I think to say that KG's defense would limit but not stop McHale. Comes down to a personal opinion, with no definitive way of settling it.

I think Garnett is the better rebounder, and better defender, and was subject to absolutely terrible teammates for large stretches of his time.

I think McHale is a heck of a defender in his own right, but the better offensive player by a large margin. In the same way of saying that McHale benefited by playing next to cream of the crop defenders during his time in Boston, KG's PPG averages benefited by being the #1 option in his offense.

I think both guys dominated their eras at the PF position, and that's why I rank them:

1) Duncan
2) McHale, KG
4) Barkley, Malone

[barefacedmonk]

Today's players would destroy the 80's players huh? Yeah, that is the argument that most generations make against ones they didn't live in. It's the same story. Shaq is better then Wilt, Michael better then Oscar, Lebron better then Bird and here I am reading that the 80's C's would have won more titles with an 'in his prime KG then McHale".

Well, it's always a hard call to make. Let me ask this, would an 'in his prime KG be able to guard McHale? No is my answer and I mean that emphatically. You could make a very good argument that in 86 when the C's won the title that McHale could have easily been the leagues' MVP if he hadn't been somewhat injured. I love KG and think he is one of the best defensive players I have ever seen. That being said, I dont think he is a better power forward then McHale was.

That in a lot of ways sums up the fun and the frustration of these kinds of debates.

I hate when people say things like "Kwame Brown's athleticism would've taken the NBA by storm in the 1950's. He would've been a HOF'er."

Because, that's true, without context. Kwame has had better training, the experience of what works and what doesn't when developing a basketball player from age 11, better medical technologies, all that.

So yes, putting Kwame Brown in the middle of 1950's and 1960's NBA would be like sending the terminator back to 1990. He would dominate.

But, that's only giving one guy in the equation the benefits of modern training and technology, which is ridiculous.

You can only compare guys in the context of their own period. In that regard, saying Kevin McHale, the guy who is acknowledged to at worst be the 2nd most talented offensive post player of the modern era (some rank him behind Hakeem) would still be able to score on KG I think is fair.

It is also fair I think to say that KG's defense would limit but not stop McHale. Comes down to a personal opinion, with no definitive way of settling it.

I think Garnett is the better rebounder, and better defender, and was subject to absolutely terrible teammates for large stretches of his time.

I think McHale is a heck of a defender in his own right, but the better offensive player by a large margin. In the same way of saying that McHale benefited by playing next to cream of the crop defenders during his time in Boston, KG's PPG averages benefited by being the #1 option in his offense.

I think both guys dominated their eras at the PF position, and that's why I rank them:

1) Duncan
2) McHale, KG
4) Barkley, Malone

Agree with everything you said. Although, personally, I would rank KG with Duncan at the first spot followed by your list.

[Moranis]

1. Duncan
2. Garnett
3. Malone
4. McHale
5. Barkley
6. Rodman
7. Nowitzki
8. Pettit
9. Hayes
10. Webber

[tenn_smoothie]

tim duncan is not a forward - he has played center for the spurs any way you want to look at it. i never understood his inclusion in this debate.

my top 3 would be garnett, mchale and malone in that order. i give the edge to garnett and mchale because of their defense and mchale could have scored all he wanted if he had been his team's go-to guy on offense - just happens that he played with the best shooting forward of all time, not to mention one of the top 10 centers in history and for the first part of his career, behind yet another retired jersey (max) and the team's 2nd leading scorer at the time.

speaking of power forwards, as well as one of my all-time favorite celtics, does cedric maxwell have any shot at the hall of fame - i've always been disappointed about the way the celtics organization treated max for many years until he and Red patched up their differences - he was a charter member of the original Big 3 as far as i've always been concerned. all he did was win the finals mvp in '81 and then win game 7 for us in '84 (along with robert parish).

[Moranis]

the last few seasons Duncan has played a lot more center, but early on he played way more minutes at PF.  I mean, David Robinson was the starting center for the first 6 years of Duncan's career.  Then the Spurs added Rasho Nesterovic for the next 3 years.  06-07 is the first time he really started to play more at center, but the spurs did still have Elson and Oberto, who both played center for them.

[Celtics17]

I also disagree that Kwame Brown would rule a 1950's league because of his athleticism. That's kind of like saying Dominique Wilkins would be just barely above 'average' as far athleticism goes in todays NBA. Let's not froget that Russ was a top 5 in the world high jumper and Wilt was probably the MOST athletic player the league has ever seen. HOw exactly would Kwame competer with those players?

[Army_of_One_Nation]

Overall----KG
Overall Offense---Karl Malone
Overall Defense---KG
Rebounding---Larry "Mr. Mean" Smith and Rodman
Tough Guy---Maurice Lucas
No D---Nowitzki
3 point shooter---Kevin McHale and Sheed
Low post player---Elvin Hayes and Elton Brand (pre-surgery)
One-on-one---Barkley
Underrated---David Lee and Jerry Lucas
Overrated---Tim Duncan because he was always the center for his team when Robinson retired.
Passing---Chris Webber
Dribbling---Chris Webber
All-stat and nothing else---Amare
Smallest yet effective---Elgin Baylor

Just my humble opinion.

[Jon]

Overall----KG
Overall Offense---Karl Malone
Overall Defense---KG
Rebounding---Larry "Mr. Mean" Smith and Rodman
Tough Guy---Maurice Lucas
No D---Nowitzki
3 point shooter---Kevin McHale and Sheed
Low post player---Elvin Hayes and Elton Brand (pre-surgery)
One-on-one---Barkley
Underrated---David Lee and Jerry Lucas
Overrated---Tim Duncan because he was always the center for his team when Robinson retired.
Passing---Chris Webber
Dribbling---Chris Webber
All-stat and nothing else---Amare
Smallest yet effective---Elgin Baylor

Just my humble opinion.

Kevin McHale was a career 41/157 from downtown for a grand total of 26% shooting.  How do you equate him with being the greatest 3 point shooting PF of all time? 

If anything, he should be on your list of great low post PFs, as he arguably was the greatest post up PF of all time. 

[Mike-Dub]

Since 1980:

#1) Tim Duncan
#2) Kevin McHale, Kevin Garnett
#4) Karl Malone, Charles Barkley

I second this and for those people saying Duncan wasn't a PF... What was he alongside David Robinson?

[GreenFaith1819]

I argued in favor of KG (vice Timmy) earlier in this thread.

I can now see the logic of those who placed Tim Duncan 1st - he was, arguably, the best Traditional, Back-to-Basket PF, ever - with Kevin McHale a close second.

KG? Arguably the most versatile PF - offensively and defensively.

[GreenFaith1819]

Man, I hope someone places Rasheed Wallace on a list, somewhere...I just reviewed an 8 min youtube clip of his Post-Defense on Dwight last year in Game 1 of our blowout vs ORL.

He absolutely flustered Dwight....just took him out.