So Blake's not as good as Malone because he suffered a broken kneecap last season?
Gotcha. That makes perfect sense, because surely Malone would have played right through a broken kneecap.
Sorry, but that's the silliest argument that I can think of for arguing in favor of Malone. There are many very strong points one might make in Malone's favor, but holding a broken kneecap against BG is inane.
I think your final point is much more valid, but that's not what Sloan said. You're reading into his statement much more than I did.
And there's nothing "politically correct" (what a useless term that is) about giving credit where it's due. Again, I never said he had to agree that BG is in Malone's class. Quite the opposite. But there's nothing wrong with acknowledging a young player's accomplishments, even as you stand up for your own guy's achievements (among which never suffering a broken kneecap ranks pretty low).
My standard for a no-nonsense but classy coach is Bob Stoops (sorry, you football haters). He'll stand up for his players every time, but he's not afraid to give credit to other team's athletes. You lose nothing by tipping your hat where it's deserved. Only a petty and petulant child is unwilling to do so, and it seems that's just what Sloan is.
And I don't know what having stronger bones than your opponent is but luck. It's not hard work or determination that strengthens one's bones; it's luck of the draw. And unless you're claiming that Malone's kneecaps (and other various and sundry bones) are invincible, that they can't be broken by any force known to man, then luck played a role in his never having had one broken, strong and superior as they are.
And I have to think that, when a reporter asks a coach to compare a current player to one of his former stars, bone density and strength are not really what they're asking about.