Where does Barkley rank all-time?

[jlauber]

Top-15?

Maybe the greatest player to never win a ring?

[Round Mound]

In terms of Impact, Effiicency and Dominance Top 10 All Time

EFF Top 10 All Time
PER Season and Play-Offs Top 10-11 All Time
+/- Top 5 All Time
Shot Made/Missed Diferential Top 4 All Time
Win Shares Per 48 Minutes Top 8 All Time

Top 10

But some people value rings so maybe around Top 10-15

And Yes maybe he will end up as the 2nd if Lebron doesn`t win one

[Sarcastic]

In terms of Impact, Effiicency and Dominance Top 10 All Time

EFF Top 10 All Time
PER Season and Play-Offs Top 10-11 All Time
+/- Top 5 All Time
Shot Made/Missed Diferential Top 4 All Time
Win Shares Per 48 Minutes Top 8 All Time

Top 10

But some people value rings so maybe around Top 10-15

Who in the top 10 can you legitimately say he was better than?

[SuperPippen]

Second greatest PF ever.
At his peak, one of the best offensive rebounders ever, and a great rebounder overall.
Stretch of dominance was second only to MJ during their eras.
Great, efficient scorer.
One of the most exciting, memorable, unique and fun to watch players ever.
Primary reason for not winning a ring was because he simply had the rotten luck of peaking at the same time Michael Jordan did.


On my list, he's number 16.

[jlauber]

This is a tough one for me...

Russell, MJ, Magic, Wilt, Kareem, Shaq, Duncan, Kobe, Bird, Hakeem, Moses, West, Oscar, Dr. J, Robinson, KG, Havlicek, Pettit, Barry, Dirk, ...possibly K. Malone, and Baylor.

Probably missing someone (and no, I don't include Mikan for reasons I have given before.)

Barkley may have been more talented than several of those guys, though.

[eliteballer]

Barkley is one of the best offensive forces but he wasn't a factor defensively. He's probably around 20.

[Jacks3]

Certainly higher than Dork.

Probably top 15 ever.

[jlauber]

Certainly higher than Dork.

Probably top 15 ever.

What the hell is your problem???

[Round Mound]

Who in the top 10 can you legitimately say he was better than?

Very few.

- MJ
- Wilt
- Kareem
- Shaq
- Big 0
*Bird and Magic
*As All Round Players but not in terms if Impact :no:

He is in the fight with Duncan, Baylor and Dr J somewhere a round there

[Round Mound]

This is a tough one for me...

Russell, MJ, Magic, Wilt, Kareem, Shaq, Duncan, Kobe, Bird, Hakeem, Moses, West, Oscar, Dr. J, Robinson, KG, Havlicek, Pettit, Barry, Dirk, ...possibly K. Malone, and Baylor.

Probably missing someone (and no, I don't include Mikan for reasons I have given before.)

Barkley may have been more talented than several of those guys, though.

:roll: :no: :rolleyes: Malone wasnt better than Barkley don`t be dummy :hammerhead: i have prooven this time after time :facepalm

[SuperPippen]

Barkley is one of the best offensive forces but he wasn't a factor defensively. He's probably around 20.

The same can be said about Magic, Bird, and Erving, three players who are usually ahead of him on all-time lists.

[magnax1]

Around 20. He's a top 10 offensive player for sure, and probably a little higher then 20 peak, but his prime was pretty short. He wasn't the same to me at all after 93, and there were a couple years in philly where he didn't look 100% for whatever reason (91 and 92 specifically). Also, the fact that he continued to spot up for, and take 3 pointers always bugged me.
But I do really respect him. He was probably the second best player in the late 80's and early 90's, behind Jordan, and I'd even take him ahead of Magic most of those years.

[jlauber]

:roll: :no: :rolleyes: Malone wasnt better than Barkley don`t be dummy :hammerhead: i have prooven this time after time :facepalm

K. Malone? Yeah...I agree. I would take Barkley over him.

[eliteballer]

The same can be said about Magic, Bird, and Erving, three players who are usually ahead of him on all-time lists.

Actually no. Erving was considered a very good defender and those other two have intangibles Barkley didnt. IE playing five positions(Magic), better at creating their own shot(Bird), Passing and making guys better(both). Hell, Magic led the league in steals and Bird made some all-defensive teams.

Also, they couldnt be exploited like Barkley. Barkley was undersized at his position and because of that he was a weakness. Magic was switched off to two guards and 3's, while Bird at least had size to be a nuisance even if he didnt have the quicks.

[eliteballer]

Players with a career argument over Barkley:

Hakeem
Pippen
Shaq
Jordan
Isiah
Bird
Karl Malone
Moses Malone
Havlicek
Russell
Oscar
Chamberlain
Kobe
Pettit
LeBron
Robinson
Garnett
Baylor
Duncan
Dirk
Kareem
Rick Barry


I'm sure I'm missing a guy or two and then theres others who come in strictly if Prime is concerned.

[CAstill]

He's in the 14-20 range
He was better than malone for sure
and he's still better than Lebron.

[SuperPippen]

Actually no. Erving was considered a very good defender and those other two have intangibles Barkley didnt. IE playing five positions(Magic), better at creating their own shot(Bird), Passing and making guys better(both). Hell, Magic led the league in steals and Bird made some all-defensive teams.

Also, they couldnt be exploited like Barkley. Barkley was undersized at his position and because of that he was a weakness. Magic was switched off to two guards and 3's, while Bird at least had size to be a nuisance even if he didnt have the quicks.

I agree with some of what you stated above, and I do think Erving was a decent defender, from what I've seen (I only stated that many don't believe that he was). But I still wouldn't say that Magic or Bird impacted the game defensively to a greater extent than Barkley did.

The bolded are irrelevant when discussing defense.

[Legends66NBA7]

He's in Top the 10-20 range.

[Doranku]

Top 15 of all-time.

In my eyes, he's easily the best/most productive and efficient player to never win a ring at this point.

[magnax1]

Also, they couldnt be exploited like Barkley. Barkley was undersized at his position and because of that he was a weakness. Magic was switched off to two guards and 3's, while Bird at least had size to be a nuisance even if he didnt have the quicks.
Magic definitely was exploited like Barkley. His poor defense was a large part of why the Lakers were never a great defensive team.

[eliteballer]

The bolded are irrelevant when discussing defense.

I'm talking about as total players.


Magic definitely was exploited like Barkley. His poor defense was a large part of why the Lakers were never a great defensive team.

The Lakers had great defensive teams, you dont win a title, let alone MULTIPLE without it. Part of it is due to their style of play though. Grind it out lock down defense isnt as much of a possibility when you want to run and gun. But when they had to, sure.

Magic had no problems guarding guys at or near his size, and he was such a huge mismatch offensivly(even more than Barkley) that it more than offsets the fact that at 6-9 he couldnt guard speedy PG's.

[magnax1]

The Lakers had great defensive teams, you dont win a title, let alone MULTIPLE without it. Part of it is due to their style of play though. Grind it out lock down defense isnt as much of a possibility when you want to run and gun. But when they had to, sure.

Magic had no problems guarding guys at or near his size, and he was such a huge mismatch offensivly(even more than Barkley) that it more than offsets the fact that at 6-9 he couldnt guard speedy PG's.
He couldn't guard guys his own size though, especially the last 4 or 5 years of his career, and on top of that what you say about the Lakers defense is untrue. They were above top 1/3rd only a few times during Magic's whole career.

[bizil]

I think GOAT wise, Chuck is anywhere from 14-20. But I think his peak value has him as the best PF of all time. KG, Duncan, Hayes, and Malone can be argued too. But Chuck redefined the PF spot more than any player until KG came along. The only edge KG and Timmy have in my book is their height and defense. I've ALWAYS considered Chuck better than Karl. Mailman was a great player and in GOAT terms, might have the edge on Chuck. But peak value wise, Chuck is the CREAM of PF's. It can be argued that a ring is the only thing stopping Chuck from getting in the GOAT top ten list. I also think Chuck is closer to Magic and Bird than people think in terms of flat out who is the better player. Chuck was a SF and PF all rolled into one and was a freakish athlete to boot. He had point forward type skills in terms of playmaking that tend to get underrated as well.

[Big#50]

Top 10. He was that great. Young kids need to watch some games pre 2006.

[OldSchoolBBall]

Top 14-18 somewhere. I have him in the 14-16 range personally. I have guys like Karl Malone and Moses above him, but that's due to accolades - I don't think either was better than Barkley at their peak.

[OldSchoolBBall]

Who in the top 10 can you legitimately say he was better than?

He has a definite case for being better than Kobe prime vs. prime. Maybe Duncan, too.

[Dragonyeuw]

There were Bulls-76ers games back in the late 80's-90's where Barkley actually looked like the best player on the floor, WITH Jordan in his prime. That tells you how good he was. In terms of his impact on the game, definitely top 20 all-time.

[Jacks3]

He has a definite case for being better than Kobe prime vs. prime.

:oldlol:


No. Not really.

[Asukal]

Top 11-20 for me. :cheers:

[KevinNYC]

Barkley is one of the best offensive forces but he wasn't a factor defensively. He's probably around 20.

Actually no. Erving was considered a very good defender ....Hell, Magic led the league in steals and Bird made some all-defensive teams.

Also, they couldnt be exploited like Barkley. Barkley was undersized at his position and because of that he was a weakness. Magic was switched off to two guards and 3's, while Bird at least had size to be a nuisance even if he didnt have the quicks.

Is this the standard were using now, if you're not a DPOY candidate you were not a factor on defense? How could a guy who averaged

7.7 defensive rebounds
1.5 steals
0.8 blocks

per game for over 16 years, not be considered having an impact on defense.
This is getting silly.

I would love to see some examples of who exploited Barkley defensively.

(Also describing Bird as a mere nuisance on defense is also revisionist history. His feet weren't quick, but his hands were very quick on D. In this thread (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=230228), I posted some clips of early Bird in the playoffs on D. He had a very positive impact on D. He had a problem on quick players in the open floor, but everything else he did pretty well and he didn't make mistakes.)

[rodman91]

Better player than couple of Top 10 players.

But because of rings..more like 11-20.

[OldSchoolBBall]

:oldlol:


No. Not really.

Yes, really. Barkley from '89-'93 was arguably better than Kobe ever was.

[JordanTime]

he isn't top 10 in my books.

I have Charles Barkley 14-20 all time.

[Jacks3]

Yes, really. Barkley from '89-'93 was arguably better than Kobe ever was.
:roll: :roll: :roll:

Prime Kobe is better on both ends, more durable, and his prime was longer.

Barkley has no case.

Deal with it.

[RRR3]

Players I have over Sir Charles:
MJ
Wilt
Kareem
Magic
Bird
Shaq
Duncan
Hakeem
Bill Russell
Big O
Kobe
Jerry West?

13th maybe? could be argued higher I suppose. Him and Malone are damn close, although Barkley had the better peak for sure.

[Yung D-Will]

I find it so much easier to rank by position because when you try to combine it all into 1 list it ends up looking all wrong.

[PHILA]

After the top 3 (Bird, Magic, Jordan) Barkley was perhaps the top offensive weapon of his era. Even better some nights. Without question the greatest mismatch we have seen. :applause:

[pauk]

Top 15

[Miserio]

Top 60 right behind Paul Pierce

[BarberSchool]

#14

http://images.checkoutmycards.com/zoom/f5000fb0-7055-4059-ba76-ba15341e44c6.jpg

[ShaqAttack3234]

The only players that I have clearly above Barkley are Kareem, Jordan, Shaq, Hakeem, Bird, Magic, Russell, Duncan, Kobe and Wilt.

After them, Barkley is in the same range as Lebron and West on my list. Maybe you could throw in 1 or 2 more guys that I'd acknowledge have a case by my criteria, but he's top 15 as far as I'm concerned at the very least.

Barkley really had one championship-caliber cast during his prime and that was '93 when you certainly couldn't have expected more from him. They had the best record in the NBA(62-20) despite KJ not being at his usual level while missing 33 games. The Suns were 61-15 with Barkley that season and it says a lot that in the one prime year you have a cast capable of contending, you go to game 6 of the finals and if not for Paxson's shot, that series goes to a 7th game in Phoenix. That was vs a Bulls team that had won 2 consecutive titles, had a better team than Phoenix with Jordan, Pippen and Grant, and MJ averaging 41/9/6 on 51% shooting in the finals.

It's true that Barkley wasn't a good defensive player, and I'd agree that his laziness and to a lesser extent, lack of height could hurt a team defensively. But his rebounding definitely helped and he was one of the best offensive players of all time.

Look at his casts in Philly from '87-'92, or even '86 when you consider that Moses was injured. Which of those years should he have won?

He had better casts in Phoenix, but he was bothered by nagging injuries pretty much every year from the '93-'94 season on and in his 30's by that point so I wouldn't call that his prime.


He couldn't guard guys his own size though, especially the last 4 or 5 years of his career, and on top of that what you say about the Lakers defense is untrue. They were above top 1/3rd only a few times during Magic's whole career.

I agree to some extent. Magic's man to man defense was never good, and I'd agree that it got worse, but he did have his strengths. Good at helping out and doubling and he could play the passing lanes.

But he had trouble with both smaller guards and forwards who could post up.

His best defensive years came earlier in his career before his actual prime as a player('87-'91).

[Round Mound]

I rank him Top 10

Lets also remember that Chuck was the Master of Destroying Zone Defenses and Creating Ilegal Defenses do to the Double Teaming he Recieved.

Also Barkley dominated the 2-Point Region in Legendary Ways

21.6 PPG on Two-Point FG% of 58.13% On Only 12.9 Two-Point FGAs PG (Season)
22.5 PPG on Two- Point FG% of 55.13% On Only 14.5 Two-Point FGAs PG (Play-Offs)

[OldSchoolBBall]

:roll: :roll: :roll:

Prime Kobe is better on both ends, more durable, and his prime was longer.

Barkley has no case.

Deal with it.

On offense, Barkley was superior, and Kobe's actual defensive impact on games isn't very large generally since he's merely an average team/help defender.

[eliteballer]

On offense, Barkley was superior, and Kobe's actual defensive impact on games isn't very large generally since he's merely an average team/help defender.


"Kobe," says Celtic Coach Doc Rivers, "might be the best help defender since Pippen."


http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/4972/it-s-the-lakers-court-but-it-s-the-celtics-house

:oldlol: Barkley isnt better than Kobe as a scorer. Getting a high percentage off of offensive rebounds doesnt change that either. He's not the shooter, ballhandler, creator, free throw shooter Kobe is so teams didnt have to gameplan for him the same way, and thus, the whole team. Barkley is going to hurt you in the post. You KNOW where. Kobe? He might hurt you from anywhere, even off the ball.

I'm not even factoring in that you dont have to play man defense anymore.

Perfect example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fk2N-dy7zA8

All ISO's.

[Jacks3]

On offense, Barkley was superior, and Kobe's actual defensive impact on games isn't very large generally since he's merely an average team/help defender.
Wrong. Kobe is a better scorer AND a better passer/play-maker. He's more versatile and much more skilled, plus he's better in the clutch. His prime is much longer than Barkely's, and he's much better defensively than Chuck, who was a liability.

LMAO @ average help/man defender. Wow. :oldlol:

Barkley has NO CASE over Bryant as a player.

Deal with it.

[eliteballer]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I4ULRxuXGWk&t=7m49s
Kobe draws 2 guys and leaves the entire Wolves defense out of sync. Guys open all over the floor.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I4ULRxuXGWk&t=10m32s
Kobe draws 3 guys and gets Odom the easy look for the foul and 2 free throws.

Thats the difference.

[Round Mound]

Wrong. Kobe is a better scorer AND a better passer/play-maker. He's more versatile and much more skilled, plus he's better in the clutch. His prime is much longer than Barkely's, and he's much better defensively than Chuck, who was a liability.

LMAO @ average help/man defender. Wow. :oldlol:

Barkley has NO CASE over Bryant as a player.

Deal with it.

Barkley has a Higher...

-PER
-EFF
-Plus/Minus (+/-)
-Shot Made/Missed Diferential
-Win Shares
-Win Shares Per 48 Minutes etc

He scored 56 points in the Play-Offs something Kobe hasn`t done.

Just because a shot jacker shoots like 45 attempts to score 81 on the worst team in NBA History it doesn`t make him a better scorer.

Barkley shot a Way Higher % than Kobe and Inside the Two-Point Line he is only rivaled by Shaq, Wilt, Kareem and McHale

He averated 12.9 RPG in the Play-Offs...Kobe?

He averaged nearly 4 apg which is 1 less than the Guard (who supposevly should average more apg)

Barkley > Kobe as a total player

Also Barkley was 7th in Defensive Rating when he had a decent center for 1 year as starter in Moses. Kobe has never been a Top 10 Defensive Rating Player. Ever!

Also Barkley was a Better Shot Blocker in his Prime than Kobe ever was

[Round Mound]

Kobe can`t rival the all around game Barkley had

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jwxGTjEwcg8

[eliteballer]

LMAO.

According to PER in 2008 Amare was the 3rd best player in the league, Bosh was better than Duncan and Kobe, Carl Landry was better than Carmelo, Nash, and Iverson, and Caron Butler was better than Paul Pierce.

It's a sh!t stat with flaws all over the place.

Same with stuff like win shares, they will naturally favor guys with worse teamates.

[RRR3]

LMAO.

According to PER in 2008 Amare was the 3rd best player in the league, Bosh was better than Duncan and Kobe, Carl Landry was better than Carmelo, Nash, and Iverson, and Caron Butler was better than Paul Pierce.

It's a sh!t stat with flaws all over the place.

Same with stuff like win shares, they will naturally favor guys with worse teamates.

Tim Duncan 2008 PER: 24.4 Kobe: 24.2 Bosh: 23.8 Why are you makjng up lies?
Carl Landry played 42 games in 2008, averaging 16.9 minutes a game. Have you not heard of small sample sizes?
And Caron Butler averaged 20/7/5 in 2008. He was pretty damn good.

[eliteballer]

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/hollinger/statistics?year=2008&action=login&appRedirect=http%3a%2f%2finsider.espn.go.com%2fnba %2fhollinger%2fstatistics%3fyear%3d2008

Go back to your tonka trucks kid

[RRR3]

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/hollinger/statistics?year=2008&action=login&appRedirect=http%3a%2f%2finsider.espn.go.com%2fnba %2fhollinger%2fstatistics%3fyear%3d2008

Go back to your tonka trucks kid
Go to basketball reference. More reliable than shitty ESPN.

[eliteballer]

Right...the stat was created by a guy who works for ESPN:roll:

[Big#50]

Put Barkley in any Kobe championship team, and he wins the same rings. Kobe never impacted a game as much as the truly elites.
He has all those defensive teams, but I have never seen him make a key play, shut down a player, bother the other team, and I have watched about 400 Lakers games.

[RRR3]

Right...the stat was created by a guy who works for ESPN:roll:
Perhaps the forumlas are different? Anyways, PER is not perfect, no stats are, but it's a fine stat if you don't overuse it.

[Jacks3]

Barkley has a Higher...

-PER
-EFF
-Plus/Minus (+/-)
-Shot Made/Missed Diferential
-Win Shares
-Win Shares Per 48 Minutes etc
WS/WS48 also have Dirk ahead of Bird,Robinson well ahead of Hakeem,peak CP3 ahead of Magic, etc.

PER is a garbage stat. EFF is the poor-man's PER.




He scored 56 points in the Play-Offs something Kobe hasn`t done.
Just like he never came remotely close to doing things like this:
81 points
62 points in three quarters
9 straight 40+ point games
13 straight 35+ point games
4 straight 50+ point games
4 straight 45+ point games
Averaged 40+ PPG for entire month 4X
25 50+ point games
5 60+ point games
110 40+ point games


etc?


Just because a shot jacker shoots like 45 attempts to score 81 on the worst team in NBA History it doesn`t make him a better scorer.
That "jacker" is well-above average in TS%, doesn't hold the ball the way Chuck did, and is a better passer/play-maker. :oldlol:

Barkley shot a Way Higher % than Kobe and Inside the Two-Point Line he is only rivaled by Shaq, Wilt, Kareem and McHale
Yawn. Dantley also has the much higher TS%. In fact, his PPG/TS% are easily better than either Kobe or Barkley's. Is he the better scorer? Not even close.




He averaged nearly 4 apg which is 1 less than the Guard (who supposevly should average more apg)
Kobe averages more assists, has a clear edge in peak, and does this while playing in the triangle, which limits his APG numbers. Plus, APG aren't a good measure of play-making. Can Barkley handle the ball like Bryant? Can he become a PG like Bryant has? Can he run the P/R like Bryant, or slash and kick? Control transition and pace? Can he drive and dump it off to bigs the same way?Nope. Kobe is easily the better play-maker/passer.


Barkley > Kobe as a total player
Kobe is better offensively. Kobe is better defensively. Kobe has better intangibles. Kobe's prime lasts longer. Kobe is more skilled and more capable of taking over games. He's more clutch. His prime lasts longer. He's more durable.

Barkley has NO CASE. Deal with it.



[/QUOTE]

[Jacks3]

[QUOTE=Big#50]Put Barkley in any Kobe championship team, and he wins the same rings. Kobe never impacted a game as much as the truly elites.
:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

[RRR3]

LOL @ Jacks acting like Kobe is some brilliant passer. He's better than Barkley at passing, whoop-de-damn doo!

[Big#50]

[QUOTE]
:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:
Can you post something other than smileys? You really think Kobe impacts the game as much as Bird/Duncan/Shaq/MJ? If so, give me an example of Kobe doing anything that came close to these players. Dont ****ing give me the 81 points non-sense against the ****ing weakest team in the league.

[Jacks3]

LOL @ Jacks acting like Kobe is some brilliant passer. He's better than Barkley at passing, whoop-de-damn doo!
One of the best non-PG play-makers ever. Yup. U mad.

[Jacks3]

Can you post something other than smileys? You really think Kobe impacts the game as much as Bird/Duncan/Shaq/MJ? If so, give me an example of Kobe doing anything that came close to these players. Dont ****ing give me the 81 points non-sense against the ****ing weakest team in the league.
That's not what you said, you moron.

Oh. And Kobe is better than Duncan.

LMAO @ putting Dunkedon up there with Jordan/Shaq.

[RRR3]

One of the best non-PG play-makers ever. Yup. U mad.

Not really. And no Kobe is not better than Duncan. GTFO

[Big#50]

That's not what you said, you moron.

Oh. And Kobe is better than Duncan.

LMAO @ putting Dunkedon up there with Jordan/Shaq.
So, nothing? Thought so.

[Jacks3]

Not really. And no Kobe is not better than Duncan. GTFO
Yes really. And yeah, he's easily better than Dunnkedon.

Deal with it.

[BlackJoker23]

the duncan nvthugger is at it. lol at putting duncan with shaq and mj and thinking ur dumbass will get away with it. 37 ppg average by amare phucking stoudemire. goddman he just took a shit on duncan and wiped his ass with him

That's not what you said, you moron.

Oh. And Kobe is better than Duncan.

LMAO @ putting Dunkedon up there with Jordan/Shaq.
this

[Jacks3]

So, nothing? Thought so.
Yeah, can't say shit. That's what I thought.

Retard Sperms fans.


:facepalm

[Jacks3]

the duncan nvthugger is at it. lol at putting duncan with shaq and mj and thinking ur dumbass will get away with it. 37 ppg average by amare phucking stoudemire. goddman he just took a shit on duncan and wiped his ass with him


Yup. Dunkedon=most overrated player ever.

lol @ this clown putting him with Shaq/Bird/Jordan. :oldlol:

[RRR3]

Yes really. And yeah, he's easily better than Dunnkedon.

Deal with it.
He's not even the best playmaker at his position and never has been. T-Mac was better until a few years ago, and Wade is better now. And Duncan is better, deal with it.

[Big#50]

Yup. Dunkedon=most overrated player ever.

lol @ this clown putting him with Shaq/Bird/Jordan. :oldlol:
How many alt accounts do you have?

[Jacks3]

He's not even the best playmaker at his position and never has been. T-Mac was better until a few years ago, and Wade is better now. And Duncan is better, deal with it.
T-Wack was never better, and current Kobe is well past his prime. He's still one of the best non-PG play-makers ever, specifically in his prime.

And no, Kobe>Duncan.

Deal with it.

[Jacks3]

How many alt accounts do you have?
^ Clown thinks Duncan>Shaq. :oldlol:

[BlackJoker23]

lol at big#50. the player in his username was shitted on by hakeem. his other mancrush was shitted on by amare. the twin towers were shitted on collectively by kobe and shaq time after time:roll:

[Jacks3]

lol at big#50. the player in his username was shitted on by hakeem. his other mancrush was shitted on by amare. the twin towers were shitted on collectively by kobe and shaq time after time:roll:
:roll:

[OldSchoolBBall]

LMAO @ average help/man defender. Wow. :oldlol:

Barkley has NO CASE over Bryant as a player.

Deal with it.

I said that Kobe is an average team/help defender, which he is. Maybe above average, but nothing great (regardless of whatever nonsense eliteballer posts - anyone with eyes can see that Kobe's team/help D is nothing special, his gimmick D on Rondo in the Finals notwithstanding). He's great at man defense when he tries. And yes, Barkley has a case over Kobe.

[Round Mound]

PER does measure Impact and Efficiency and Barkley was a Better More Impactful Player than Kobe. He was the third from 1993-95 or 2nd best Player 1987-1993 in the game right there with MJ and Hakeem.

Infact Kobe has been a 3rd Best Player in the League at his highest for 1 season.

Talking about Dirk...He has also been a More Efficient and Impacful Player than Kobe Ever Was. Needed Less to Win a Ring. Same with Duncan and Garnett till about 3 years ago since they are in the end of their career.

What is more productive?


22.1 PPG 54.1% FG
21.6 PPG on 58.13% Two-Point FG on Only 12,9 Two-Point FGAs PG
11.7 RPG
4.0 APG
1.5 SPG
0.8 BPG

To...

25.3 PPG on 45.5% FG
5.3 RPG
4.7 APG
1.5 SPG
0.5 BPG

Play-Offs

23.0 PPG on 51.3% FG
22.5 PPG on 58.13% Two-Point FG on Only 14.5 Two-Point FGAs PG
13.0 PRG
4.0 APG
1.6 SPG
0.9 BPG

To...

25.4 PPG on 44.8% FG
5.1 RPG
4.8 APG
1.4 SPG
0.7 BPG


Sir Charles is and was clearly a More Productive, Efficient, Impactfull and Dominant Player than Kobe Ever was Or Will Be.

[RRR3]

T-Wack was never better, and current Kobe is well past his prime. He's still one of the best non-PG play-makers ever, specifically in his prime.

And no, Kobe>Duncan.

Deal with it.
T-Mac was most certainly a better playmaker and passer than Kobe ever was. Get your head out of his ass.

[Jacks3]

And yes, Barkley has a case over Kobe.
No.

Kobe is better offensively. He's a better scorer and a better play-maker/passer.

Kobe is better defensively.

Kobe has a longer prime.

Kobe has better intangibles.

Kobe is more explosive,more capable of taking over games, and more clutch.

He's more versatile/skilled.

Chuck has NO case.

Deal with it.

[Jacks3]

T-Mac was most certainly a better playmaker and passer than Kobe ever was. Get your head out of his ass.
You're a moron. 03 Kobe is a better play-maker than T-Wack ever was, and he's one of the best non-PG play-makers ever. Deal with it.

[rodman91]

4 Championships (4 as franchise player)
3 FMVPs
2 MVPs
Franchise player since 98.


VS

5 championships (2 as franchise player)
2 FMVPs
MVP.
Franchise player since 04.

Duncan over Kobe.

http://www.halloffamememorabilia.com/images/products/p-490708-kobe-bryant-tim-duncan-may-31-1999-sports-illustrated-magazine-hc-gbxocfixzu.jpg

http://cache.sharenxs.com/images/wz/cabb/aj/a-/af/be/TimDuncameGamOverLH.gif

[RRR3]

You're a moron. 03 Kobe is a better play-maker than T-Wack ever was, and he's one of the best non-PG play-makers ever. Deal with it.
:roll: :roll: :roll:

He's [T-Mac] a slightly better passer. lol @ "much better". Wow. :oldlol:
http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=235456&page=7

Goddamn.

[Jacks3]

Moron can't even differentiate between passing and play-making.

****king idiot. :roll:

[RRR3]

Moron can't even differentiate between passing and play-making.

****king idiot. :roll:
T-Mac turned the ball over less too for what it's worth. Better assist percentages and better turnover percentages. How the hell is Kobe a better playmaker? The knock on him for years is that he hasn't been a good team player, something that he has only stopped being criticized for in recent years.

[eliteballer]

T-mac's not a better passer. The triangle lowers assists.

..and you dont win championships without being a team player:oldlol:

[RRR3]

T-mac's not a better passer. The triangle lowers assists.

..and you dont win championships without being a team player:oldlol:
Even your boy jacks admitted T-Mac was a better passer. Goddamn, son.




(opens pocket)


Get back in there, son.





Next.





:oldlol: :oldlol: :lol :lol :roll: :roll: :roll:

[Jacks3]

Your boy T-Wack got the same criticism for not being a "team" player, and he's also one of the best non-PG play-makers ever. Those "critics'' are retards. :facepalm

Anyway, their "AST%" numbers are very similar, but I prefer Kobe as play-maker slightly over T-Wack due to his superior handles and drive/kick ability. I also feel he drew slightly more defensive attention in his prime and creates more "hockey-assists". T-Wack is the superior passer in terms of court-vision/awareness/technical skill, but that's not the same as play-making.

Deal with it.

[RRR3]

:rant Kobe! :blah Kobe :rant Kobe! :blah Kobe :rant Kobe! :blah Kobe :rant KOBEEEEE DA GOAT GAWDD!!!!
:sleeping

[Big#50]

:roll:
LoL keep laughing at your alt account posts. Kid, I don't care about some bball players as much as you do. You know how I know you're 15?

[Jacks3]

LoL keep laughing at your alt account posts.
Don't have any.

Moron.

[bizil]

The scary thing about Chuck and KG is that they play big like a big man should. With Chuck being only 6'4 and 6'5, it makes it all the more impressive. But they are as skilled as most top tier perimeter players. With KG being 7'0 it makes that all the more impressive. It's a scary combination that makes them unique. Other PF's like a Webber, LJ, Kemp, and Coleman had somewhat similar qualities. But Chuck and KG maximized it all the way the longest.

[D.J.]

In actuality, Chuck is between 11 and 15. As for his peak, top 10 easily. This is a guy that put up 23/14/52/1.5 on 59.4%, 26/12+/4/1.6/1 on 57.9%, 25/11+/4/2 on 60%. The only time Philly was a contender was in Barkley's rookie season when they went to the ECF. Moses Malone missed the playoffs in '86, the Sixers overachieved greatly in '90, and they upset Milwaukee in the playoffs in '91. They weren't good at all, but Chuck is the reason for the little success they had.

[D-Wade316]

He's not even the best playmaker at his position and never has been. T-Mac was better until a few years ago, and Wade is better now. And Duncan is better, deal with it.
Wade has always been the better passer than Kobe.

[D-Wade316]

PER does measure Impact and Efficiency and Barkley was a Better More Impactful Player than Kobe. He was the third from 1993-95 or 2nd best Player 1987-1993 in the game right there with MJ and Hakeem.

Infact Kobe has been a 3rd Best Player in the League at his highest for 1 season.

Talking about Dirk...He has also been a More Efficient and Impacful Player than Kobe Ever Was. Needed Less to Win a Ring. Same with Duncan and Garnett till about 3 years ago since they are in the end of their career.

What is more productive?


22.1 PPG 54.1% FG
21.6 PPG on 58.13% Two-Point FG on Only 12,9 Two-Point FGAs PG
11.7 RPG
4.0 APG
1.5 SPG
0.8 BPG

To...

25.3 PPG on 45.5% FG
5.3 RPG
4.7 APG
1.5 SPG
0.5 BPG

Play-Offs

23.0 PPG on 51.3% FG
22.5 PPG on 58.13% Two-Point FG on Only 14.5 Two-Point FGAs PG
13.0 PRG
4.0 APG
1.6 SPG
0.9 BPG

To...

25.4 PPG on 44.8% FG
5.1 RPG
4.8 APG
1.4 SPG
0.7 BPG


Sir Charles is and was clearly a More Productive, Efficient, Impactfull and Dominant Player than Kobe Ever was Or Will Be.

This. Even in Kobe's best offensive season, 05-06, he wasn't the most impactfull. Dirk, Lebron, and Wade were his equals during the season. The same can't be said in the playoffs where he utterly choked a 3-1 lead.

Chuck & Wade > Kobe

[Jacks3]

The Greatness of Kobe Bean Bryant!!!
9X All-NBA 1st Team
2X All-NBA 2nd Team
2X All-NBA 3rd Team
9X All-NBA 1st Team Defense
2X All-NBA 2nd Team Defense
5X Top 5 DPOY/9X Top 10 DPOY
13X Time All-Star
4X Time All-Star MVP
2X NBA Finals MVP
1X NBA MVP
10th All-Time in MVP Shares
2X Scoring Champion
5 Time NBA Champion
7 Time NBA Finalist
10 55+ Win Seasons
15X Player of the Month Winner
Slam Dunk Champion (1997)
#1 Offensive APM (10 Year Study)
#10 All-Time in WAR
24 Career Average PER (15 Seasons)
2X Gold Medalist
Sporting News Player of the Decade
TNT Player of the Decade
ESPN Player of the Decade
Sports Illustrated Top 20 Male Athlete of the Decade (2000s) #7 (the only NBA player in the top 10)


Has more 50+ point games than any player in history not named Wilt or Jordan (25)
Has more 40+ point games than any player in history not named Wilt or Jordan (110)
Has more 60+ point games than any player in history not named Wilt (5)
Record Holder: Highest percentage of team points (2005-2006)
Record Holder: Most threes in one game (12)
Only player in history to score at least 600 points in three consecutive post-seasons
2001-2010 RS: 28.6 PPG/5.7 RPG/5.4 APG/1.7 SPG/0.6 BPG/56% TS
2001-2010 PS: 28.8 PPG/5.8 RPG/5.2 APG/1.8 SPG/0.6 BPG/56% TS
Some of his best seasons:
35 PPG/5 RPG/5 APG/2 SPG/0.5 BPG/56% TS
32 PPG/6 RPG/5 APG/1.5 SPG/0.5 BPG/58% TS
30 PPG/7 RPG/6 APG/2 SPG/1 BPG/55% TS
29 PPG/6 RPG/5 APG/2 SPG/0.6 BPG/55% TS
28 PPG/6 RPG/6 APG/2 SPG/0.5 BPG/58% TS
27 PPG/5 RPG/5 APG/1.5 SPG/0.5 BPG/56% TS
27 PPG/5 RPG/5 APG/1.5 SPG/0.4 BPG/55% TS
28 PPG/6 RPG/6 APG/1.4 SPG/0.5 BPG/56% TS
26 PPG/6 APG/6 RPG/2 SPG/0.6 BPG/55% TS
Some of his best post-seasons:
29 PPG/7 RPG/6 APG/2 SPG/1 BPG/56% TS (16 games)
27 PPG/6 RPG/5 APG/2 SPG/0.5 BPG/52% TS (22 games)
30 PPG/6 APG/6 APG/1.4 SPG/0.5 BPG/58% TS (22 games)
30 PPG/6 RPG/5 APG/1.5 SPG/0.4 BPG/57% TS (23 games)
29 PPG/6 RPG/6 APG/1.4 SPG/0.4 BPG/57% TS (23 games)
29 PPG/6 RPG/5 APG/1.3 SPG/0.3 BPG/58% TS (7 games)
33 PPG/5 RPG/5 APG/1.4 SPG/0.4 BPG/56% TS (5 games)
4 straight 45+ point games (2006)
4 straight 50+ point games (2007)
9 straight 40+ point games (2003)
13 straight 35+ point games (2003)
81 pts
62 points in three quarters. Outscored opposing team by himself.
27 40+ point games in one season (Only Wilt/Jordan have done that)
10 50+ point games in one season (Only player beside Wilt to do so)
Has three different games where he scored 30+ in one quarter.
Has six different games where he scored 50+ pts though three quarters.
Has five different months where he averaged 40+ PPG.
One of seven players ever with 25,000 pts/5,000 rbs/5,000 asts
6th on All-Time Scoring List
4th on All-Time Playoff Scoring List

Wade better?:facepalm
Chuck better?:facepalm

[Round Mound]

[B]Higher PER Top 10 & All Time (Jordan N

[Round Mound]

This. Even in Kobe's best offensive season, 05-06, he wasn't the most impactfull. Dirk, Lebron, and Wade were his equals during the season. The same can't be said in the playoffs where he utterly choked a 3-1 lead.

Chuck & Wade > Kobe

Tis True...

Wade is a way better all around player than Kobe, including Defense DRT, Block Shots, Steals

[MasterDurant24]

The same can be said about Magic, Bird, and Erving, three players who are usually ahead of him on all-time lists.
All were better defenders than Barkley, especially Erving. Magic and Bird were good team defenders and were good in the passing lanes.

[Round Mound]

All were better defenders than Barkley, especially Erving. Magic and Bird were good team defenders and were good in the passing lanes.

Magic a better defender than Barkley? :facepalm

Barkley was 7th in Defensive Rating until he had a center.

Barkley was a Better Shot Blocker than Both and not to mention that Barkley has the Highest SPG Average for a PF

[eliteballer]

Barkley averaged 1 block a game 3 years in his entire career. As if it was a game changing ability. Magic LED the league in steals.

as for career stats, Kobe came out of HIGH SCHOOL.

[Round Mound]

Barkley averaged 1 block a game 3 years in his entire career. As if it was a game changing ability. Magic LED the league in steals.

as for career stats, Kobe came out of HIGH SCHOOL.

Charles Averaged over 1 BPG for 5 Seasons and over a 1 SPG for his whole 16 seasons

84-85: 1.0 BPG and 1.2 SPG
85-86: 1.6 BPG and 2.2 SPG
86-87: 1.5 BPG and 1.8 SPG
87-88: 1.3 BPG and 1.3 SPG
88-89: 0.8 BPG and 1.6 SPG
89-90: 0.6 BPG and 1.9 SPG
90-91: 0.5 BPG and 1.6 SPG
91-92: 0.6 BPG and 1.8 SPG
92-93: 1.0 BPG and 1.6 SPG

Barkley was 7th in Defensive Rating when he had a center for the 1985-86 Season. 1st Season as a Starter and Moses left for those Play-Offs

So when Chuck a had decent center he was a Great Team Defender and the Best Stealing PF Ever.

Barkley had a Higher PER. Shot Made Missed Difernetial and Plus/Minus than both Bird and Magic

And ofcourse that over Kobe including WS and WS Per 48 Minutes

Barkley was More Dominant and Efficient than Kobe

[BlackJoker23]

Charles Averaged over 1 BPG for 5 Seasons and over a 1 SPG for his whole 16 seasons

84-85: 1.0 BPG and 1.2 SPG
85-86: 1.6 BPG and 2.2 SPG
86-87: 1.5 BPG and 1.8 SPG
87-88: 1.3 BPG and 1.3 SPG
88-89: 0.8 BPG and 1.6 SPG
89-90: 0.6 BPG and 1.9 SPG
90-91: 0.5 BPG and 1.6 SPG
91-92: 0.6 BPG and 1.8 SPG
92-93: 1.0 BPG and 1.6 SPG

Barkley was 7th in Defensive Rating when he had a center for the 1985-86 Season. 1st Season as a Starter and Moses left for those Play-Offs

So when Chuck a had decent center he was a Great Team Defender and the Best Stealing PF Ever.

Barkley had a Higher PER. Shot Made Missed Difernetial and Plus/Minus than both Bird and Magic

And ofcourse that over Kobe including WS and WS Per 48 Minutes

Barkley was More Dominant and Efficient than Kobe
kobe is better shut the phuck up phagg0t. barkley was garbage and overrated because he was a short midget

[eliteballer]

Yeah, you're lying. he has four seasons of 1 block a game. He didnt average 1 in 93. Makes me question all of these obscure stats you pull.

I already showed you PER is a crap stat, and will naturally favor guys on less talented teams.

Barkley's teams had contending level talent in 85, 86, 93,94,95,97,98,99 and he couldnt win ANYTHING.

[Big#50]

Yeah, you're lying. he has four seasons of 1 block a game. He didnt average 1 in 93. Makes me question all of these obscure stats you pull.

I already showed you PER is a crap stat, and will naturally favor guys on less talented teams.

Barkley's teams had contending level talent in 85, 86, 93,94,95,97,98,99 and he couldnt win ANYTHING.
Barkley was just as good as Kobe. I think he did average 1 block in 93. That was his MVP season. Honestly, once you get to the elite players, there is little that seperates them. Unless you're comparing bigs to wings.

[D.J.]

Yeah, you're lying. he has four seasons of 1 block a game. He didnt average 1 in 93. Makes me question all of these obscure stats you pull.


http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/barklch01.html

'85- 1.0
'86- 1.6
'87- 1.5
'88- 1.3
'93- 1.0



I already showed you PER is a crap stat, and will naturally favor guys on less talented teams.


It's a crap stat because it doesn't favor Kobe as much.



Barkley's teams had contending level talent in 85, 86, 93,94,95,97,98,99 and he couldnt win ANYTHING.


'85- he was a rookie and they still made the ECF
'86- Moses was injured and didn't play in the playoffs
'93- KJ missed nearly half he season and wasn't 100% in the playoffs. Barkley also played with an injured elbow in the Finals and still did well
'94- not contending level talent
'95- this was their year. They blew a 3-1 lead
'97- past his prime, as was Olajuwon
'98- even more nagging injuries
'99- damn near crippled with his back


DEAL WITH IT

[Round Mound]

Good Points DJ...

Certainly why is Kobe mentioned in this thread su much?

What does Kobe have to do with anything on the thread?

Is it because many Kobe tards are beggining to see the level tha Barkley played out from 1985-1995 > Above any Kobe Ever? Yes!

Most probable :facepalm :sleeping :violin:

[Round Mound]

[B]PER does = efficiency and dominance.

It it wasn`t so then Jordan would not be N

[ShaqAttack3234]

'85- he was a rookie and they still made the ECF
'86- Moses was injured and didn't play in the playoffs
'93- KJ missed nearly half he season and wasn't 100% in the playoffs. Barkley also played with an injured elbow in the Finals and still did well
'94- not contending level talent
'95- this was their year. They blew a 3-1 lead
'97- past his prime, as was Olajuwon
'98- even more nagging injuries
'99- damn near crippled with his back


I agree with this, except I definitely think the Suns had a lot of talent in '94, more than enough to contend, but Barkley started breaking down. He was still an elite player, but I don't consider that his prime. '88-'93 was his true prime, imo.

From a post I made a while ago.


Phoenix actually started off 24-6 in 1994 as well, but Barkley and KJ got injured around the same time. Barkley and KJ were putting up beastly numbers pre-injuries as well.

Barkley- 24.5 ppg, 12 rpg, 5.1 apg, 3.3 TO, 1.9 spg, 52.7 FG%, 58.5 TS%, 38 mpg, 28 games
Johnson- 22 ppg, 2.3 rpg, 8.9 apg, 3.5 TO, 2.1 spg, 52.6 FG%, 59.3 TS%, 37.1 mpg, 27 games

But that's the season where it was clear Barkley was declining. He was still a great player, but not as explosive and his stamina wasn't the same.

Considering Barkley ended the season averaging 21.6 ppg, 11.2 rpg, 4.6 apg, 3.2 TO, 1.6 spg, 49.5 FG%, 56.3 TS%, 35.4 mpg in 65 games, that shows how much he wore down that season, particularly the drop in scoring efficiency and minutes. Prior to the injuries, he was pretty much putting up his MVP numbers.

Regardless, they did have enough talent to contend, and more talent than Houston. Barkley was still at least a top 2 PF, KJ was the best point guard in the league, imo, while Majerle, Ceballos, Green and Ainge gave them a talented supporting cast.

They could've used a better center(one of the reasons why they were a mediocre defensive team) and the cast didn't play as well in the playoffs. But that's definitely a contending team. And they did contend, losing in 7 games to the eventual champion Rockets. Hakeem was just a beast, and Thorpe took advantage inside as well for a lot of the series.

[Round Mound]

84-85: Rookie did not start. Dr J was done with a PER 17-14 those 3 years till 1987 with Charles.
85-86: Started puts up Great All Around Stats but Andrew Toney suffers Career Ending Injury and Moses leaves for the play-offs
86-87: Charles leads the League in Rebounding etc, Dr J Retires
87-92: Pathetic Cast in Which Charles had a Higher Winning% than MJ without Pippen and Grant
92-95: Finally Good Cast KJ missing to many games (when KJ was injured the Suns had a higher winning% without him) they lost to the Bulls of MJ-Pippen-Grant and Hakeem/Otis/Horry,Casell, Smith
96-2000: Barkley was back crippled, overweight and suffered knee injuries all over: he was donde but Ainge convinced him to keep playing 95 on

[eliteballer]

Dont give me that crap. Kobe won a title in 2010 with a knee that needed surgical repair. Everyone deals with injuries at that point. Charles had enough chances and couldnt get it done. Period. He lost to the Bucks in 86 who had none near his caliber. If he'd have won ONCE, I'd give him a pass but he didnt.

He had some of the most talented teams in the L in the mid 90's, couldnt get it done. His Rockets teams lost to an equally aging Jazz squad. He couldnt get it done.

You cant see his flaws. No defense, subpar FT shooter, later in his career when he started taking too many 3's.

[NugzHeat3]

Dont give me that crap. Kobe won a title in 2010 with a knee that needed surgical repair. Everyone deals with injuries at that point. Charles had enough chances and couldnt get it done. Period. He lost to the Bucks in 86 who had none near his caliber. If he'd have won ONCE, I'd give him a pass but he didnt.

He had some of the most talented teams in the L in the mid 90's, couldnt get it done. His Rockets teams lost to an equally aging Jazz squad. He couldnt get it done.

You cant see his flaws. No defense, subpar FT shooter.
Charles doesn't deserve any blame with those Rockets teams.

They only had a one year contending window (1997) and that loss had nothing to do with Barkley. Barkley played his heart out that series and played good defense on Malone despite whatever height he was giving up. Malone was having trouble posting him up and had to rely a lot on that fadeaway plus Barkley was flat-out going at him, drawing fouls and banging in the post.

Maybe he should've closed out harder on that Stockton three but there should have never been a Stockton three considering the amount of stupidity displayed by Drexler on the Rockets' last shot. Or how the Rockets couldn't hit open perimeter shots off Hakeem double teams in game 5.

[D.J.]

I agree with this, except I definitely think the Suns had a lot of talent in '94, more than enough to contend, but Barkley started breaking down. He was still an elite player, but I don't consider that his prime. '88-'93 was his true prime, imo.


The '94 team overall was probably more talented than the '95 team. But the '95 team went up against a not quite as dominant Houston team, had home court, and also held a 3-1 lead on top of that. They completely collapsed. '95 was more their year than '94. When they went up 3-1, I really thought they were going all the way. I didn't say that about them in '94.



Dont give me that crap. Kobe won a title in 2010 with a knee that needed surgical repair. Everyone deals with injuries at that point. Charles had enough chances and couldnt get it done. Period. He lost to the Bucks in 86 who had none near his caliber. If he'd have won ONCE, I'd give him a pass but he didnt.

He had some of the most talented teams in the L in the mid 90's, couldnt get it done. His Rockets teams lost to an equally aging Jazz squad. He couldnt get it done.

You cant see his flaws. No defense, subpar FT shooter, later in his career when he started taking too many 3's.


Barkley's first two years in Houston alone he missed 43 games. He missed just 94 in his first 12 seasons. This past year, Kobe didn't miss a game and he still put up 25/5/5. Obviously, his knee wasn't that bad.

DON'T GIVE ME THAT CRAP

[D.J.]

Charles doesn't deserve any blame with those Rockets teams.

They only had a one year contending window (1997) and that loss had nothing to do with Barkley. Barkley played his heart out that series and played good defense on Malone despite whatever height he was giving up. Malone was having trouble posting him up and had to rely a lot on that fadeaway plus Barkley was flat-out going at him, drawing fouls and banging in the post.

Maybe he should've closed out harder on that Stockton three but there should have never been a Stockton three considering the amount of stupidity displayed by Drexler on the Rockets' last shot. Or how the Rockets couldn't hit open perimeter shots off Hakeem double teams in game 5.



Yeah, 1997 was their only shot. In 1998, they were lucky to make the playoffs. Barkley missed a fair amount of games and Olajuwon missed 35. Drexler and Kevin Willis carried that team to the playoffs and they nearly knocked off Utah. 1999, they coasted through the season but they had no depth. It was the big 3(Olajuwon/Barkley/Pippen) plus Michael Dickerson.

[eliteballer]

Kobe gets the benefit of the doubt, he came off back to back titles. He came off SURGERY.

Charles? Just another season where he ended up a loser. He DOESNT get the benefit of the doubt.

[D.J.]

Kobe gets the benefit of the doubt, he came off back to back titles. He came off SURGERY.

Charles? Just another season where he ended up a loser. He DOESNT get the benefit of the doubt.


Thank you for confirming your bias and that you have no clue what you're talking about.

[eliteballer]

....because your not biased right:roll: I got nothing against Charles. He was a great player, but he had his faults and I sure dont think his prime was top 10.

[D.J.]

....because your not biased right:roll:


No I'm not. Myself and several others have all backed up our claims with stats and legitimate ones at that. Not TS% and ignoring stats that don't favor Kobe.

You and Jacks do not contribute anything, insult those that don't agree with you(which eliminates any credibility you had), and troll the boards.

DEAL WITH IT

[Round Mound]

Barkley > Bryant

At everything pretty much but FT and 3-Point Shooting.

[PTB Fan]

Charles Barkley is a remarkable player! One of the best PFs ever. It's really really debatable between him and Malone for #2 PF ever. He's in the 10-20 range IMO

[Round Mound]

Charles Barkley is a remarkable player! One of the best PFs ever. It's really really debatable between him and Malone for #2 PF ever. He's in the 10-20 range IMO

I don`t think ages 22-31 Barkley was Better than Malone but totally better.

Sad his lifestyle off the court wasn`t very good

[Deuce Bigalow]

Barkley > Bryant

At everything pretty much but FT and 3-Point Shooting.

uh...no

Kobe is the better scorer, playmaker, passer, shooter, and defender
and the better player with the championships to prove it

[Jacks3]

Kobe is the better scorer,passer,play-maker,clutch player, defender, has a much longer prime, has much better team success, has better longevity, has better intangibles. Barkley has no case.

[Round Mound]

Kobe is the better scorer,passer,play-maker,clutch player, defender, has a much longer prime, has much better team success, has better longevity, has better intangibles. Barkley has no case.

Barkley`s stats blow right away passed Bryant. Bryant wasn`t a better passer he is a guard so through a system he had to create more but in terms of comparring him to other SGs there are planthy that where Better Passers. In the case of Barkley very few if any where as good as him at Passing at the PFs spot. Barkley had almos 7 rebounds at more average more than Kobe and he did score 56 in a play-off game. Bryant`s claim was the regular season game vs the Worst Franchise in NBA History, the Clippers 81 points won of the worst ball hogg moments in History.

Barkley appears in brokwn down stats of efficiency and impact right there with the Top 10 ALl Time

Only 2 Players to appear in EFF, PER, Plus/Minus, Shot Made/Missed Diferential, WS and WS Per 48 Minutes etc

Only other player is MJ.

Kobe wasn`t dominant or as efficient as Barkley. He is lucky the whole media, coaches and all provided him with a Good Team ALL OF HIS CAREER and in his Prime.

Had Kobe played in the 80s and 90s he would have won no rings at all too.

[Deuce Bigalow]

Barkley`s stats blow right away passed Bryant. Bryant wasn`t a better passer he is a guard so through a system he had to create more but in terms of comparring him to other SGs there are planthy that where Better Passers. In the case of Barkley very few if any where as good as him at Passing at the PFs spot. Barkley had almos 7 rebounds at more average more than Kobe and he did score 56 in a play-off game. Bryant`s claim was the regular season game vs the Worst Franchise in NBA History, the Clippers 81 points won of the worst ball hogg moments in History.

Barkley appears in brokwn down stats of efficiency and impact right there with the Top 10 ALl Time

Only 2 Players to appear in EFF, PER, Plus/Minus, Shot Made/Missed Diferential, WS and WS Per 48 Minutes etc

Only other player is MJ.

Kobe wasn`t dominant or as efficient as Barkley. He is lucky the whole media, coaches and all provided him with a Good Team ALL OF HIS CAREER and in his Prime.

Had Kobe played in the 80s and 90s he would have won no rings at all too.

all you got is that Barkley is more efficient, even though Kobe is a SG and Barkley is a PF

Barkley has Kobe ranked 6th alltime, Kobe is better, deal with it

[Round Mound]

all you got is that Barkley is more efficient, even though Kobe is a SG and Barkley is a PF

Barkley has Kobe ranked 6th alltime, Kobe is better, deal with it

PFFF HaHa....Charles always playing with what he says. Don`t u even get it?. Before he didn`t rank him in the Top 10 at all. Over Hakeem? Thats laguahble :oldlol: :hammerhead: . And Barkley was almost as Dominant as Hakeem was, Kobe no where near in that level.

Barkley had Better Stats than Bryant and in All Broken Down Stats he Just Blows by him.

Bryant would not have won one ring without Shaq or 2 Dominant Big Men in a Twin Tower System Gasol and Bynum. Not to mention Odom the Best Sixman in the League

Kobe is lucky and right there with Bill Russell as the Most Overrated and Hyped Players Ever

[Jacks3]

His stats don't blow by Barkley's at all. You realize that Kobe has a higher peak PER than Barkley? I'll take his 30-7-6-2-1-55% stat-line in 2003 over anything Barkley did.

Yes, Kobe is easily a better passer/play-maker. Why is irreverent. The fact remains his APG/AST% numbers are easily better,he's a much better ball-handler, and he has the inherent advantage as a guard.

And no, Kobe's "claim" isn't the 81 point game, though it does destroy anything Barkley did as a scorer.

Nobody cares about your garbage stats. The fact is, Kobe is a better scorer, passer,play-maker,ball-handler, defender,leader, and has the longer prime with superior longevity. There's a reason 99.9% of lists have Kobe over Barkley. Barkley isn't even better than West or Oscar. LMAO @ Kobe not winning rings in the 80's/90's. Just because Barkley couldn't win with his stacked Suns teams?

Kobe>Barkley

Deal with it.

[Round Mound]

Anyway...The Thread is not about Kobe!!! :no: :facepalm :rolleyes:

You Kobe stans are fearfull that people who have watched the game more say what i say too.

[Jacks3]

99.9% of fans have Kobe over Barkley. u mad?

[Deuce Bigalow]

Barkley is a great player no doubt
But Kobe has 5 championships, 5, Barkley has none
and Barkley never made it to an All Defensive team, while Kobe has 11 times

[Nelson14]

Somewhere in the top 20

[Round Mound]

His stats don't blow by Barkley's at all. You realize that Kobe has a higher peak PER than Barkley? I'll take his 30-7-6-2-1-55% stat-line in 2003 over anything Barkley did.

Yes, Kobe is easily a better passer/play-maker. Why is irreverent. The fact remains his APG/AST% numbers are easily better,he's a much better ball-handler, and he has the inherent advantage as a guard.

And no, Kobe's "claim" isn't the 81 point game, though it does destroy anything Barkley did as a scorer.

Nobody cares about your garbage stats. The fact is, Kobe is a better scorer, passer,play-maker,ball-handler, defender,leader, and has the longer prime with superior longevity. There's a reason 99.9% of lists have Kobe over Barkley. Barkley isn't even better than West or Oscar. LMAO @ Kobe not winning rings in the 80's/90's. Just because Barkley couldn't win with his stacked Suns teams?

Kobe>Barkley

Deal with it.

Take Barkleys 1985-86 and 1995-96 Play-Off PER thats Barkley`s Prime

Oh and what about Play-Off PER? Thank u

Deal with It

[Deuce Bigalow]

Take Barkleys 1985-86 and 1995-96 Play-Off PER thats Barkley`s Prime

Oh and what about Play-Off PER? Thank u

Deal with It

Playoff runs

Kobe's best playoff runs, where he made it to the finals
2008 - 30/6/6 on 48%
2009 - 30/5/6 on 46%
2001 - 29/7/6 on 47%
2010 - 29/6/6 on 46%
2002 - 27/6/5 on 43%

Barkley doesnt match that

[Jacks3]

\

Deal with It[/B]
Kobe: Superior scorer/passer/play-maker/defender/clutch player/ball-handler/better intangibles/better longevity/longer prime/much more team success/more accolades-accomplishments.

Ranked higher on 99.9% of lists.

Deal with it.

[Jacks3]

Somewhere in the top 20
THIS.

[D.J.]

Even with just 1 ring, Barkley is top 10. It's amazing he led the 76ers to 53 wins in '90.



Playoff runs

Kobe's best playoff runs, where he made it to the finals
2008 - 30/6/6 on 48%
2009 - 30/5/6 on 46%
2001 - 29/7/6 on 47%
2010 - 29/6/6 on 46%
2002 - 27/6/5 on 43%

Barkley doesnt match that


25/15.8/5.6 on 57.8% in '86
27/11.7/5.3 on 64.4% in '89
24.7/15.5/4.3 on 54.3% in '90
24.9/10.5/6 on 59.2% in '91

[Deuce Bigalow]

Even with just 1 ring, Barkley is top 10. It's amazing he led the 76ers to 53 wins in '90.





25/15.8/5.6 on 57.8% in '86
27/11.7/5.3 on 64.4% in '89 3 games
24.7/15.5/4.3 on 54.3% in '90
24.9/10.5/6 on 59.2% in '91 8 games

..

[D.J.]

..


Not Barkley's fault the Sixers sucked and couldn't give him decent talented teammates. I still remember the comment he made about Charles Shackleford in '90 or '91. Barkley's playoff numbers are very comparable to Kobe's. Switch teams and put Barkley next to Shaq and he's winning rings.

[Deuce Bigalow]

Not Barkley's fault the Sixers sucked and couldn't give him decent talented teammates. I still remember the comment he made about Charles Shackleford in '90 or '91. Barkley's playoff numbers are very comparable to Kobe's. Switch teams and put Barkley next to Shaq and he's winning rings.

oh the shaq argument now, well Kobe won 2 without him, thats 2 more than Sir Charles
barkley's numbers are good, but the 80s were very high paced, so that makes it close to Kobe's

[Jacks3]

Barkley's Suns team were way more talented than what Kobe has had built around him. Kevin Johnson/Cedric Ceballos/Dan Majerle/Ainge/Chambers/Dumas/A.C Green/Danny Manning/.:eek:

Still couldn't win jack-shit.

:facepalm

[D.J.]

oh the shaq argument now, well Kobe won 2 without him, thats 2 more than Sir Charles


2 with Gasol/Bynum and Odom.



barkley's numbers are good, but the 80s were very high paced, so that makes it close to Kobe's


Anything to bring Chuck down. From '86 until his departure, this is how Philly ranked in offensive rating:


9th(out of 23)
13th
10th
3rd(out of 25)
2nd(out of 27)
13th
11th


The Sixers were not at all high paced. Aside from '89 and '90, they were slightly above average at best.

[Jacks3]

lol Bynum.

6 pts/4 rbs in the back-to-back rings.

Didn't even play in 2008 and the Lakers still made the Finals.

:roll:

[Deuce Bigalow]

2 with Gasol/Bynum and Odom.





Anything to bring Chuck down. From '86 until his departure, this is how Philly ranked in offensive rating:


9th(out of 23)
13th
10th
3rd(out of 25)
2nd(out of 27)
13th
11th


The Sixers were not at all high paced. Aside from '89 and '90, they were slightly above average at best.

Oh my god Gasol and glass knees Bynum :bowdown:
lol

1985-86 76ers: 110.4 PPG
1986-87 76ers: 106.5 PPG
1987-88 76ers: 105.7 PPG
1988-89 76ers: 111.9 PPG
1989-90 76ers: 110.2 PPG

slightly higher pace, not that much of a difference though

[Deuce Bigalow]

lol Bynum.

6 pts/4 rbs in the back-to-back rings.

Didn't even play in 2008 and the Lakers still made the Finals.

:roll:

:bowdown: :bowdown:

[D.J.]

Oh my god Gasol and glass knees Bynum :bowdown:
lol

1985-86 76ers: 110.4 PPG
1986-87 76ers: 106.5 PPG
1987-88 76ers: 105.7 PPG
1988-89 76ers: 111.9 PPG
1989-90 76ers: 110.2 PPG


Offensive rating:


'86- 9th out of 23
'87- 13th out of 23
'88- 10th out of 23
'89- 3rd out of 25
'90- 2nd out of 27


3 years with 23 teams and they were no higher than 9th. In a 30 team league, that's the equivalent of finishing 12th, 17th, and 13th. They were an average-slightly above average team at best offensively.

[Deuce Bigalow]

Offensive rating:


'86- 9th out of 23
'87- 13th out of 23
'88- 10th out of 23
'89- 3rd out of 25
'90- 2nd out of 27


3 years with 23 teams and they were no higher than 9th. In a 30 team league, that's the equivalent of finishing 12th, 17th, and 13th. They were an average-slightly above average team at best offensively.

Im comparing it to the 00s not to the 80s/90s

[Jacks3]

:bowdown: :bowdown:
6 PPG/4 RPG. The GOAT. :bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown:

[resin_baller]

I'd rank Barkley around 14-15 all time. If we were ranking primes, he'd probably make the top 10, but his prime was too short.

[EricForman]

Very few.

- MJ
- Wilt
- Kareem
- Shaq
- Big 0
*Bird and Magic
*As All Round Players but not in terms if Impact :no:

He is in the fight with Duncan, Baylor and Dr J somewhere a round there

You think Barkley is better/greater than DUNCAN AND BAYLOR AND DOCTOR J but not Oscar Robertson, who won one ring as the second guy. I'm not gonna get into Barkley vs any of those dudes but Duncan is DEFINITELY better/greater than Oscar, and Baylor and Doc have strong cases too.

Stop getting hyped up in "nice rounded numbers". Oscar get so much love for 30-10-10 because "rounded triple doubles" look cool. The reality was anyone who was any good had insane numbers, and Baylor's were arguably better at 31-16-4. Hell, Jerry Lucas put up 21-21 and 19-19 for multiple seasons. You could argue 21-21 is better than 30-10-10 too.

[Round Mound]

Duncan wasn`t Better than Barkley :facepalm

[Round Mound]

Offensive rating:


'86- 9th out of 23
'87- 13th out of 23
'88- 10th out of 23
'89- 3rd out of 25
'90- 2nd out of 27


3 years with 23 teams and they were no higher than 9th. In a 30 team league, that's the equivalent of finishing 12th, 17th, and 13th. They were an average-slightly above average team at best offensively.

:applause:

[EricForman]

Duncan wasn`t Better than Barkley :facepalm

yes he was. Duncan is the greatest power forward of all time. you know that, in addition to the 20 he dropped a night, Duncan was a defensive anchor right? he wasn't prime Mutombo or Dwight elite but not too far off.

Chuck would have to be a significantly superior offensive player to cancel out that defensive gap.

[Round Mound]

yes he was. Duncan is the greatest power forward of all time. you know that, in addition to the 20 he dropped a night, Duncan was a defensive anchor right? he wasn't prime Mutombo or Dwight elite but not too far off.

Chuck would have to be a significantly superior offensive player to cancel out that defensive gap.

[B]Offensively its not even close.

Barkley Dominated the Two-Point Region more than Duncan could Dream Off:

21.6 PPG on 58.13% Two-Point FG% on Only 12.9 Two-Point FGAs PG
22.5 PPG on 55.13% Two-Point FG% on only 14.5 Two-Point FGAs PG

Thats close Offensively? :rolleyes: :no:

Not to mention Barkley was the Player that Recieved More Double Teams and Rotating Defenders of the 80s and mid 90s.

The "Master at Creating Ilegal Defenses" and also Called the "Zone Buster

[eliteballer]

It's a HELL of a lot closer offensively than it is defensively.

Duncan is a 10 defensively and Barkley is a 2....yet Barkley is more complete?:roll:

Although Duncan is really a center

[Round Mound]

Barkley was a mix of a Guard, Forward and Center.

He could Post Up and Shoot Over Bigs and Smaller Faster Players: He could even go by them 1 on 1 and Dunk

He could Block Shots...get the Rebound go Coast to Coast and Fnish Himsel or Pass Off.

His Skills where above any other PF Ever

Its not close at all Offensively

[bizil]

I think in terms of who flat out are the best players ever at PF in terms of prime or peak value, I feel Chuck is the greatest. But I wouldn't argue at all with somebody who said Duncan or KG. Malone, Hayes, Dirk, Pettit, a prime Webber, and Mchale would round out my top PFs in terms of prime or peak value. I think KG, Duncan,and Chuck are on another level.

I give the edge to Chuck because of the way he would force his will on a game scoring wise. And the myriad of way Chuck could get his points. He slash to the rack better than KG or Timmy and had more range on his shot. Plus Chuck qualified as a freakish athlete in his prime at 6'5 and 265 pounds. He could kill with speed,leaping ability,and strength all rolled into one. And Chuck was the best rebounder out of the group as well. And was the best passer, even though these three along with Webber are the best passing PF's of all time.

But I would never discourage ANYONE from taking Duncan or KG over Chuck cause they are 7 footers with awesome all around ability. Duncan can anchor you defense as good as any center (cause he was bascially a center) and KG is a 7 foot freak athlete that can play any position on the floor. But a prime Barkley is the cream of the crop at PF cause of the way he could dominate a game across the board.

[Round Mound]

I think in terms of who flat out are the best players ever at PF in terms of prime or peak value, I feel Chuck is the greatest. But I wouldn't argue at all with somebody who said Duncan or KG. Malone, Hayes, Dirk, Pettit, a prime Webber, and Mchale would round out my top PFs in terms of prime or peak value. I think KG, Duncan,and Chuck are on another level.

I give the edge to Chuck because of the way he would force his will on a game scoring wise. And the myriad of way Chuck could get his points. He slash to the rack better than KG or Timmy and had more range on his shot. Plus Chuck qualified as a freakish athlete in his prime at 6'5 and 265 pounds. He could kill with speed,leaping ability,and strength all rolled into one. And Chuck was the best rebounder out of the group as well. And was the best passer, even though these three along with Webber are the best passing PF's of all time.

But I would never discourage ANYONE from taking Duncan or KG over Chuck cause they are 7 footers with awesome all around ability. Duncan can anchor you defense as good as any center (cause he was bascially a center) and KG is a 7 foot freak athlete that can play any position on the floor. But a prime Barkley is the cream of the crop at PF cause of the way he could dominate a game across the board.


Agree :applause:

[Bigsmoke]

Dirk is better

[D-Wade316]

Dirk is better
Name me one of aspect of Dirk where he is better than Chuck, excluding the 3pt, ft shooting of course.

[EricForman]

Name me one of aspect of Dirk where he is better than Chuck, excluding the 3pt, ft shooting of course.

Dirk is a better shooter literally in every spot on the court. Let's not actlike it's just threes and FTs.

[Inception28]

Duncan wasn`t Better than Barkley :facepalm
:oldlol: really?

What Duncan accomplished in the 2003 season was better than anything Barkley ever accomplished in his career.

[RRR3]

Dirk is a better shooter literally in every spot on the court. Let's not actlike it's just threes and FTs.
Shockingly, Barkley was still a more efficient and flat-out better offensive player. Where does Dirk make up the gap? Defense? :roll: :roll: :roll:

[ShaqAttack3234]

Dont give me that crap. Kobe won a title in 2010 with a knee that needed surgical repair. Everyone deals with injuries at that point. Charles had enough chances and couldnt get it done. Period. He lost to the Bucks in 86 who had none near his caliber. If he'd have won ONCE, I'd give him a pass but he didnt.

He had some of the most talented teams in the L in the mid 90's, couldnt get it done. His Rockets teams lost to an equally aging Jazz squad. He couldnt get it done.

I'm not comparing Barkley and Kobe either way. Just pointing out that PRIME Barkley only did have 1 team that had a shot at an NBA title. Prime Barkley being '88-'93. If you want to hold '94 or '95 against him when ranking his career, that's fine, but it really doesn't show what prime Barkley would've been capable of with those rosters. He was a shell of his former self by the time he got to Houston as well.

The '86 Sixers didn't have Moses in the playoffs as has been mentioned many times, and the Bucks were loaded in the 80's.


The '94 team overall was probably more talented than the '95 team. But the '95 team went up against a not quite as dominant Houston team, had home court, and also held a 3-1 lead on top of that. They completely collapsed. '95 was more their year than '94. When they went up 3-1, I really thought they were going all the way. I didn't say that about them in '94

I think the '95 Rockets were better than the '94 Rockets by the playoffs. Drexler was great in the playoffs and played his best basketball since Portland's second trip to the finals in '92, Horry played the best ball of his career, Hakeem had a playoff run as good as you can have, the team was great in the clutch, role players hit big shots, Cassell improved and gave them a good point guard duo between him and Smith.

The regular season record doesn't it show it, but the fact that they beat teams that won 60, 59, 62 and 57 games in the playoffs proves how good they were. kind of like the '01 Lakers being superior to the '00 Lakers, but their records not showing it due to a variety of issues in '01.


yes he was. Duncan is the greatest power forward of all time. you know that, in addition to the 20 he dropped a night, Duncan was a defensive anchor right? he wasn't prime Mutombo or Dwight elite but not too far off.

Chuck would have to be a significantly superior offensive player to cancel out that defensive gap.

I think that Barkley was significantly better offensively, but I'd agree that the gap defensively was bigger.

I'd put Duncan ahead of Dwight and Mutombo defensively as well. Duncan was significantly smarter and more disciplined defensively than Dwight. Very well players have been as good as Duncan as blocking and altering shots without biting on fakes. Mutombo also couldn't and wouldn't defend the perimeter like Duncan. Mutombo really camped in the lane, wouldn't step out on pick and rolls, or often jump shooting big men in general and picked up a lot of illegal defenses.

Both are/were great defenders, but Duncan was a better guy to have anchoring your defense, imo. I hate the fact that he doesn't have a single DPOY to show for it.

[Bigsmoke]

Name me one of aspect of Dirk where he is better than Chuck, excluding the 3pt, ft shooting of course.

better scorer, less lazy, better leader, clutch shooting... and oh! Winning titles http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e129/BigSmokes/rimshot.gif

[RRR3]

better scorer, less lazy, better leader, clutch shooting... and oh! Winning titles http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e129/BigSmokes/rimshot.gif
:no:

[D.J.]

I think the '95 Rockets were better than the '94 Rockets by the playoffs. Drexler was great in the playoffs and played his best basketball since Portland's second trip to the finals in '92, Horry played the best ball of his career, Hakeem had a playoff run as good as you can have, the team was great in the clutch, role players hit big shots, Cassell improved and gave them a good point guard duo between him and Smith.



If Phoenix doesn't have that epic collapse, we're not even having this discussion. It's not like Houston steamrolled through the '95 playoffs. They trailed 2-1 and needed 5 games to beat Utah. They went 7 with Phoenix and went 6 with San Antonio. Prior to playing Orlando, they played in 18 out of a possible 19 games. '94 on the other hand, they played in 16 out of a possible 19 games before playing the Knicks. A 3-1 win over Portland which saw them blowing a win in the 4th quarter of game 3, 4-3 over Phoenix, and 4-1 over Utah. Phoenix was the only one that gave them any sort of difficulty.

[magnax1]

I'm not comparing Barkley and Kobe either way. Just pointing out that PRIME Barkley only did have 1 team that had a shot at an NBA title. Prime Barkley being '88-'93. If you want to hold '94 or '95 against him when ranking his career, that's fine, but it really doesn't show what prime Barkley would've been capable of with those rosters. He was a shell of his former self by the time he got to Houston as well.
This is exactly right, and I think it's worth pointing out he lost in 93 because the best player ever put up one of his best series ever, averaging 40 ppg and dropping 55 in what was probably the most important game. It's not like Barkley didn't have a beastly series himself anyway.

[D.J.]

This is exactly right, and I think it's worth pointing out he lost in 93 because the best player ever put up one of his best series ever, averaging 40 ppg and dropping 55 in what was probably the most important game. It's not like Barkley didn't have a beastly series himself anyway.


http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=237442

[ShaqAttack3234]

better scorer, less lazy, better leader, clutch shooting... and oh! Winning titles http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e129/BigSmokes/rimshot.gif

Dirk is not a better scorer than Barkley. Barkley was the better scorer, passer and overall offensive player. Barkley was extremely dominant offensively, very few players of his era or later were doubled as much, Shaq, and maybe Hakeem come to mind, but few others.


If Phoenix doesn't have that epic collapse, we're not even having this discussion. It's not like Houston steamrolled through the '95 playoffs. They trailed 2-1 and needed 5 games to beat Utah. They went 7 with Phoenix and went 6 with San Antonio. Prior to playing Orlando, they played in 18 out of a possible 19 games. '94 on the other hand, they played in 16 out of a possible 19 games before playing the Knicks. A 3-1 win over Portland which saw them blowing a win in the 4th quarter of game 3, 4-3 over Phoenix, and 4-1 over Utah. Phoenix was the only one that gave them any sort of difficulty.

They didn't have homecourt advantage in any series in '95, while they had homecourt in every series in '94, that made a huge difference. They were taken to 7 games twice each year. Obviously, their first round series went 5 games in '95 and just 4 in '94, but the Jazz were vastly superior to the '94 Blazers and they won 60 games vs Portland's 47. Their sweep of Orlando says a lot as well considering how talented Orlando was(definitely more talented than the '94 Knicks).

[pauk]

1. jordan
2. wilt
3. kareem
4. russell
5. larry
6. magic
7. shaq
8. oscar
9. duncan
10. hakeem
11. kobe
12. jerry west
13. moses malone
14. karl malone
15. charles barkley <---
16. julius erving
17. dirk nowitzki
18. lebron james
19. david robinson
20. havlicek / pippen

[Round Mound]

1. jordan
2. wilt
3. kareem
4. russell
5. larry
6. magic
7. shaq
8. oscar
9. duncan
10. hakeem
11. kobe
12. jerry west
13. moses malone
14. karl malone
15. charles barkley <---
16. julius erving
17. dirk nowitzki
18. lebron james
19. david robinson
20. havlicek / pippen

:oldlol: :facepalm :rolleyes:


Pretty Funny. No Malone wasn`t better than Barkley but at longevity and FT shooting.

[EricForman]

Shockingly, Barkley was still a more efficient and flat-out better offensive player. Where does Dirk make up the gap? Defense? :roll: :roll: :roll:


there is no "gap" offensively between Chuck and Dirk, at least not in the way where Chuck is ahead. You watched the 2011 playoffs right? Dirk's offense is all time elite. what the hell you laughing at? yourself for thinking Chuck is a significantly superior offensive player?

Barkley shot higher percentage because he's stronger, faster, more athletic, more aggressive at getting layups, whatever. He was not a better shooter anywhere on the court. Is he a better offensive player, if you factor in every aspect? Perhaps, but again, there is NO gap.

i'm not even trying to argue one being better than the other, i was merely stating that Dirk is a superior shooter.

[Round Mound]

there is no "gap" offensively between Chuck and Dirk, at least not in the way where Chuck is ahead. You watched the 2011 playoffs right? Dirk's offense is all time elite. what the hell you laughing at? yourself for thinking Chuck is a significantly superior offensive player?

Barkley shot higher percentage because he's stronger, faster, more athletic, more aggressive at getting layups, whatever. He was not a better shooter anywhere on the court. Is he a better offensive player, if you factor in every aspect? Perhaps, but again, there is NO gap.

i'm not even trying to argue one being better than the other, i was merely stating that Dirk is a superior shooter.

Barkley is a Better Face Up Mid Range Shooter

Dirk is a Better Fadeway Shooter.

Barkley dominated the Mid and Post Region like nobody thats why his FG% is Higher than Anyone not named Shaq as a Focal Scorer

[eliteballer]

Barkley is a better ballhandler, creator, post player, and at getting to the line.