The Crazy idea that Sir Charles Barkley didn't have help

[kennethgriffin]

this is a quote from one of his fans Round Mound


That its Why its Stupid to make an All Time Great Player List because of Number or Rings.

Make All Time Great Player Lists According to Statistica Efficiency Evidence (sad but true), Impact They Made in the Game, Rule Changes That Where Enfourced For That Player, How Many Double or Triple Teams He Forced etc.

hes mad about a list of players who won with help. apparently he thinks charles had none



guys who were allstars and huge contributors while playing with kobe

nick van exel, eddie jones, shaquille oneal, karl malone, gary payton, pau gasol, andrew bynum, ron artest, dwight howard, steve nash




guys who were allstars and were huge contributors while playing with barkley

andrew tony, maurice cheeks, moses malone, julius erving, hersey hawkins, dan majerle, kevin johnson, tom chambers, danny manning, michael finley, hakeem olajuwon, clyde drexler, kevin willis, scottie pippen, steve francis



barkleys had 7 hall of famers, kobes had 5

barkleys had 16 all stars, kobes had 10

barkley played with most of his help for a good amount of time, kobe had 4 of his allstars for just 1 season, 2 of them were injured (nash, malone), 2 of them were before he even started for LA ( nick,eddie )

barkley played with a hall of famer during his prime ( kevin johnson ) kobe played with no hall of famers during his peak ( 2005-06 to 2009-10 )

gasol is not a hall of fame nba player. maybe internationally he is. but not strictly based on nba resume

i agree that rings arnt the only thing to judge a guy on. but they are used as tie breakers between comparable players

obviously barkley is better than horry

but no way is he better than guys who could get the job done with far less help

barkleys an underachiever who had a ton of help throughout his career. he never won because he lacks passion, heart, conditioning, work ethic, defensive pride, and the ability to respect or earn respect from team mates

scottie pippen pretty much summed up chucks career

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8-ugxfIYANA

"sorry fat butt"



http://i39.tinypic.com/b7jnns.jpg

[magnax1]

He had help in 93, but then he left his prime in 94. So he had a good team for a year in his prime.

[KG215]

The hell is your problem with Barkley? This is the second anti-Barkley thread from you in a week. I don't think most people even rank him ahead of Kobe when doing an all-time list. I think Barkley's peak/prime has a case over Kobe's in terms of just overall impact and play, but in terms of career/legacy, I think most people rank Kobe higher.

And you said something about how Kobe had some All-Star/HOF teammates before his prime or when they were old...wasn't Dr. J already past his prime when Barkley was drafted? And he had, what, two or three years (his first two or three years in the league) with Moses Malone? By his 4th or 5th year in the league (late 80s/early 90s)his supporting casts in Philly weren't anything great. I mean wasn't Hersey Hawkins his #2 for awhile?

Then he got to Houston, past his prime, and had other guys on the back-end of their prime in Hakeem and Clyde. Not that they weren't still very good players, but if you're going to move the goalposts and make excuses for Kobe, then be fair and do the same for Barkley.

[kennethgriffin]

The hell is your problem Barkley? This is the second anti-Barkley thread from you in a week.

And you said something about how Kobe had some All-Star/HOF teammates before his prime or when they were old...wasn't Dr. J already past his prime when Barkley was drafted? And he had, what, two or three years (his first two or three years in the league) with Moses Malone? By his 4th or 5th year in the league (late 80s/early 90s)his supporting casts in Philly weren't anything great.


I dont hate the guy. I just think his favorite fan needed a reality check


And yes barkley had hall of famers who were old. Young, prime, a bunch of allstars. He has no excuse

Its not like hes f*ckin some dude stuck on the clippers his whole life

[iamgine]

He had help in 93, but then he left his prime in 94. So he had a good team for a year in his prime.
Yeps. One season of help. Got to the finals.

[I<3NBA]

Barkley faced MJ. Kobe faced who?

[JtotheIzzo]

The OP is a Kobe homer, ergo facto delusional, but this Barkley thread is his second this week, so he has a bit of an agenda. Most importantly he was likely swimming in jizz during much of Barkley's playing days so he cannot realistically comment on what goes on.

Barkley played 8 years in Philadelphia, averaged 20-10 for all but his rookie, and above 23 and 11 for all but one.

Barkley had old Moses his first two years.
Barkley had old Dr. J his first 3 years.
Barkley never really had Andrew Toney because he was always injured.
Barkley had Mo Cheeks his first 4 years.

This doesn't tell the story, it is simply an explanation of the aged, veteran team Barkley was drafted onto.

After the old vets left, Hersey Hawkins came in and was the best player Brakley played with during his prime Philly years, Hersey had a couple of big seasons averaging 20ppg living off the CB double teams.
ONCE HERSEY AND CHARLES WERE SEPARATED, Hawkins's scoring dropped 20-50%.

During Barkley's prime he was in a line up like this:

Mike Gminski
Armon Gilliam
Charles Barkley
Hersey Hawkins
Johnny Dawkins

Not exactly star studded.

Onto Phoenix. Barkley went to Phoenix on the downside of his peak, but still effective enough to win MVP. He had a great team here and challenged for the chip annually.

Barkley played one season with Tom Chambers.
Barkley played 79 games with Danny Manning.

Houston was when Barkley was washed up, it is like giving Gary Payton shit for not dominating on the Lakers.


The OP is young dumb, and sadly his Dad was too full of c*m and didn't pull out and now we have to suffer through these threads.

And why is he making it about Kobe? No one says Barkley > Kobe, just more insecure Kobestandom.

[secund2nun]

Barkley was far superior than Kobe.

Kobe without a HOFer= 2 first round losses, 1 missed playoffs, 2 7th seeds...all in his prime.

[kennethgriffin]

Barkley faced MJ. Kobe faced who?


an mvp

the greatest shooter of all time

the 2nd greatest shooter of all time

the best defensive player in the 2000s ( dpoty ) ..... twice

the 2nd best defensive player in the 2000's ( dpoty )

the 3rd best defensive player in the 2000's ( dpoty )

and the best defensive player of the 1990's ( dptoy )

a top 5 point guard all time

a top 5-10 clutch shooter all time

another top 5-10 clutch shooter all time ( twice )

and another top 5-10 clutch shooter all time ( twice )

the greatest defensive team in nba history

and a top 5 defensive team ever


---------------------------------

and thats just in the finals



in the playoffs he also faced a top 8-10 all time legend almost every year seemingly... beating him almost twice as many times


da fuq you mean "who kobe face"?

[guy]

Just counting HOFers and all-stars does not make sense.

One player can play with one HOFer for like 15 seasons, while another player can play with one HOFer in one season and then another HOFer in another, and that second HOFer has technically played with more HOFers then the other.

It would be more accurate to list compare like this:

Kobe, HOFers and number of seasons played:
Shaq - 8
Gasol - 6
Malone - 1
Payton - 1
Howard - 1
Nash - 1
Rodman - 1

Barkley, HOFers and number of seasons played:
KJ - 4
Hakeem - 4
Dr. J - 3
Drexler - 2
Moses - 2
Pippen - 1

Thats 19 vs. 16. Of course, you can say in both instances that they didn't necessarily play with some of these HOFers playing at a HOF level.

But I agree, Barkley has definitely had help.

[SilkkTheShocker]

What people don't understand about Barkley was that he was always a colossal loser. He was never going to win a title as the best player. Unless of course it was in Wilt's era.

[PHILA]

And why is he making it about Kobe? No one says Barkley > Kobe, just more insecure Kobestandom.
He is better just looking at offense. The only advantage Kobe has on him is in spot up (catch & shoot) situations and at the FT line. I believe he also has roughly 6 or so undeserved all defensive 1st team selections, notably 2009, 2010, 2011 robbing players like Wade and Tony Allen, but he certainly was an excellent defensive guard at one point.



http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=312709

In the 84 game sample footage, we can see (among other things) how underrated Barkley is in low post defense, holding the opponents to 36.5% shooting. He was undersized in height, but he played excellent position defense. He was particularly effective at pulling the chair out from the opponent like Rick Mahorn. He would get the post player leaning hard and then take a step back at the last second, often forcing a travel or poor shot. He was capable of being a very good defensive player, but as a 6'5 interior player there was definitely a ceiling to how good he could have been. He was capable of great defense in spurts, but the problem was you did not know how he was going to play on any given possession. He main weaknesses were P&R defense and overall weakside rotations/help defense. I have seen him make some freakish defensive blocks, even game winning blocks and defensive plays, but I think what stands out to most is that when he actually was out of position, he tended to be way out of position.


For all the advanced stat fanatics, we can also see that despite the team defense being below average with him on the floor, he was still having an impact due to how much worse they got with him on the bench (on both ends). He was easily better defensively than other forwards he played next to, like Tom Chambers and Armen Gilliam.

[andgar923]

I'm one of the few that's stated Chuck>>>> Kobe

Yeah I said it.

He was an amazing player, moreso when one realizes his height at that position, simply unheard of :bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown: Nobody his size has been as great at that position or even close to it, and he did it against a tough era inside the paint.

[kennethgriffin]

Just counting HOFers and all-stars does not make sense.

One player can play with one HOFer for like 15 seasons, while another player can play with one HOFer in one season and then another HOFer in another, and that second HOFer has technically played with more HOFers then the other.

It would be more accurate to list compare like this:

Kobe, HOFers and number of seasons played:
Shaq - 8
Gasol - 6
Malone - 1
Payton - 1
Howard - 1
Nash - 1
Rodman - 1

Barkley, HOFers and number of seasons played:
KJ - 4
Hakeem - 4
Dr. J - 3
Drexler - 2
Moses - 2
Pippen - 1

Thats 19 vs. 16. Of course, you can say in both instances that they didn't necessarily play with some of these HOFers playing at a HOF level.

But I agree, Barkley has definitely had help.


If you wanna get all technical... How about instead of putting 1 season next to guys like rodman and nash. And instead put 0.3

Malone was hurt too


And i'l say it again. Gasol is not a hall of fame nba player. His 2 total third team all nbas dont cut it. 4 reserve allstar games. 0-16 in the playoffs as leader

[guy]

If you wanna get all technical... How about instead of putting 1 season next to guys like rodman and nash. And instead put 0.3

Malone was hurt too


And i'l say it again. Gasol is not a hall of fame nba player. His 2 total third team all nbas dont cut it. 4 reserve allstar games. 0-16 in the playoffs as leader


Umm okay. You can do the same for alot of Barkley's teammates too, especially KJ, Hakeem, and Clyde who were very injury prone when they played with Barkley.

Gasol also has one All-NBA 2nd team. You realize Rodman has only 2 all-star games, 2 All-NBA third teams, and was never considered a leader of an NBA team right? And he's in the HOF. Gasol is going to make the HOF. Pretty much every NBA analyst thinks so and refers to him as a future HOFer. But I guess your opinion means more :oldlol:

[guy]

By the way, I love how some people who try to downplay Kobe's help just refer to prime Shaq as a HOFer or all-star :oldlol: Getting to play with Shaq in 2000 is not the equivalent of playing with Dr. J in 1987, KJ in 1993, Hakeem in 1997, Drexler in 1998, or Pippen in 1999. Not even close.

[andgar923]

Umm okay. You can do the same for alot of Barkley's teammates too, especially KJ, Hakeem, and Clyde who were very injury prone when they played with Barkley.

Gasol also has one All-NBA 2nd team. You realize Rodman has only 2 all-star games, 2 All-NBA third teams, and was never considered a leader of an NBA team right? And he's in the HOF. Gasol is going to make the HOF. Pretty much every NBA analyst thinks so and refers to him as a future HOFer. But I guess your opinion means more :oldlol:

Even if he is correct and he does't make the HOF, he's still the most talented/versatile center of his era and top 4 big man as well.

FACT is, Kobe can't win without big men, in a relatively weak big men era.

[andgar923]

By the way, I love how some people who try to downplay Kobe's help just refer to prime Shaq as a HOFer or all-star :oldlol: Getting to play with Shaq in 2000 is not the equivalent of playing with Dr. J in 1987, KJ in 1993, Hakeem in 1997, Drexler in 1998, or Pippen in 1999. Not even close.

I mean, only the most dominant player since Wilt, he's a nobody.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Not sure there is an argument for Charles > Kobe other than peak play (even that's close). Bean, in HIS peak, was an exceptional 2-way player and probably the better all-around player if we're talking pure basketball skills.

Like Dirk, I do feel Charles would have benefited playing w/ the help Kobe's been surrounded by. Guy would probably have cemented himself a top 10 player YEARS ago.

[KG215]

By the way, I love how some people who try to downplay Kobe's help just refer to prime Shaq as a HOFer or all-star :oldlol: Getting to play with Shaq in 2000 is not the equivalent of playing with Dr. J in 1987, KJ in 1993, Hakeem in 1997, Drexler in 1998, or Pippen in 1999. Not even close.
You have to realize something with Kobe stans. They think if they list factual things, and you don't take them at face value, you're the idiot for spitting in the face of factual information. Context is a completely foreign concept to them.

[DMAVS41]

It may not be fair, but Barkley's lack of a title keeps him behind a guy like Kobe with 5 titles.

If we remove all the career stuff and solely look at impact on the court. And for me all that really matters is the playoffs when discussing these all time greats...Barkley and Kobe are pretty close.

Barkley is definitely one of the best playoff performers in NBA history and I think his impact gets lost a bit in this generation. This is a guy who had a 27/14/4/2/1 playoff run to the finals in 93.

Like Kuvina said, switch up their circumstances and Barkley is for sure known as a top 10 player ever with a ton of rings.

Just the way it is.

[guy]

It may not be fair, but Barkley's lack of a title keeps him behind a guy like Kobe with 5 titles.

If we remove all the career stuff and solely look at impact on the court. And for me all that really matters is the playoffs when discussing these all time greats...Barkley and Kobe are pretty close.

Barkley is definitely one of the best playoff performers in NBA history and I think his impact gets lost a bit in this generation. This is a guy who had a 27/14/4/2/1 playoff run to the finals in 93.

Like Kuvina said, switch up their circumstances and Barkley is for sure known as a top 10 player ever with a ton of rings.

Just the way it is.

Switch up their circumstances and Kobe probably doesn't have any rings, but I highly doubt Barkley has 5 rings. Kobe had more help, but I still consider him a greater player regardless of circumstance.

[red1]

I'm one of the few that's stated Chuck>>>> Kobe

Yeah I said it.

He was an amazing player, moreso when one realizes his height at that position, simply unheard of :bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown: Nobody his size has been as great at that position or even close to it, and he did it against a tough era inside the paint.
:applause:

[Legends66NBA7]

I've always wondered what would happen if Magic Johnson and Kevin Garnett switched positions, rather than Magic on the Bulls or Garnett on the Spurs instead of Duncan. Literally Garnett from 79-80 and Magic from 95-96.

Would we still be considering Magic a Top 10 of all-time ? And would Garnett be considered Top 10 instead ?

[iamgine]

Switch up their circumstances and Kobe probably doesn't have any rings, but I highly doubt Barkley has 5 rings. Kobe had more help, but I still consider him a greater player regardless of circumstance.
If you switch em up, we need to account for the lack of good bigs and rule changes that surely would affect Barkley's game. He could be a lot better than he was as a result.

[guy]

If you switch em up, we need to account for the lack of good bigs and rule changes that surely would affect Barkley's game. He could be a lot better than he was as a result.

Barkley just didn't age well in comparison to Kobe. By the time Barkley would've gotten a good team to lead without Shaq i.e. 2008, that would've been 1995 Barkley. He was still a great player, but he was gradually declining and not that long after that he became a shell of himself. You couldn't compare 1995-2000 Barkley to 2008-2013 Kobe.

[andgar923]

Barkley just didn't age well in comparison to Kobe. By the time Barkley would've gotten a good team to lead without Shaq i.e. 2008, that would've been 1995 Barkley. He was still a great player, but he was gradually declining and not that long after that he became a shell of himself. You couldn't compare 1995-2000 Barkley to 2008-2013 Kobe.

Aside from his weight and conditioning, I wonder how much physical play had to do with his decline.

Chuck played in a very physical era in the most physical spot on the court, agasint bigger players. I'm sure that played a significant role in his decline. Other players at his position were taller, so the decline may not have been as noticeable. Chuck's game was unique than other front court player's game, he relied on athleticism to be consistent. He wasn't being guarded by players his same height as Wade would.

[iamgine]

Barkley just didn't age well in comparison to Kobe. By the time Barkley would've gotten a good team to lead without Shaq i.e. 2008, that would've been 1995 Barkley. He was still a great player, but he was gradually declining and not that long after that he became a shell of himself. You couldn't compare 1995-2000 Barkley to 2008-2013 Kobe.
Well Barkley coulda won in '99 and '04 in addition to the threepeat so that's potentially 5 rings. I think they'd have the best team in the league in '99 and '04 so it's a decent chance. Shaq-Kobe feud doesn't happen so who knows if Shaq stays. Also, he was declining in '95 but the lack of big and rule change might have helped him a ton.

[kennethgriffin]

Umm okay. You can do the same for alot of Barkley's teammates too, especially KJ, Hakeem, and Clyde who were very injury prone when they played with Barkley.

Gasol also has one All-NBA 2nd team. You realize Rodman has only 2 all-star games, 2 All-NBA third teams, and was never considered a leader of an NBA team right? And he's in the HOF. Gasol is going to make the HOF. Pretty much every NBA analyst thinks so and refers to him as a future HOFer. But I guess your opinion means more :oldlol:



Maybe if gasol was a defensive and rebounding legend who was a corner stone for multiple legendary championship runs.. Then maybe i could accept that insane comparisons of offensive all nba achievements. Or popularity allstar games. And everyone hated rodman. Evwn the coaches picking the reserves. So ya..... Try again

[guy]

Maybe if gasol was a defensive and rebounding legend who was a corner stone for multiple legendary championship runs.. Then maybe i could accept that insane comparisons of offensive all nba achievements. Or popularity allstar games. And everyone hated rodman. Evwn the coaches picking the reserves. So ya..... Try again

Ummm, so you're just going to change your criteria for whatever fits your agenda? Not surprising coming from you.

[guy]

Aside from his weight and conditioning, I wonder how much physical play had to do with his decline.

Chuck played in a very physical era in the most physical spot on the court, agasint bigger players. I'm sure that played a significant role in his decline. Other players at his position were taller, so the decline may not have been as noticeable. Chuck's game was unique than other front court player's game, he relied on athleticism to be consistent. He wasn't being guarded by players his same height as Wade would.

Who knows. No way you can really tell. I can't just assume he would still age as well though.

[guy]

Well Barkley coulda won in '99 and '04 in addition to the threepeat so that's potentially 5 rings. I think they'd have the best team in the league in '99 and '04 so it's a decent chance. Shaq-Kobe feud doesn't happen so who knows if Shaq stays. Also, he was declining in '95 but the lack of big and rule change might have helped him a ton.

I was lining up with 1985-2000 Barkley in place of Kobe on the 1998-2013 Lakers. So 1986 Barkley in 99? Spurs were a really great team at the time, and I wouldn't count on them losing especially since this was before Phil. I don't think 86 Barkley is that much better then 99 to change that series from a sweep to a win. 1991 Barkley in 04? Possibly. Lakers had injuries though and Pistons were really great, so I'm just assuming they won't. Its definitely possible though. I definitely believe 87-89 Barkley wins those 3 titles with Shaq from 00-02.

[andgar923]

Who knows. No way you can really tell. I can't just assume he would still age as well though.

In the argument of eras, I always mention that today's players are far superior at conditioning and training. On top of that they have benefit from superior science and technology. Along with a less physical era, I'm sure that Chuck will age better.

[magnax1]

If you switched out Kobe and Barkley, Barkley would probably win but I bet Kobe does too, depending on what years of his career you put him in. If you replace 21 year old barkley with 21 yo kobe you have a good chance of getting titles in philly in 85 and 86. Also I think Kobe has a really good shot with that stacked 93 team since hed be right around his peak. That team was a lot more talented than the bulls and Kobe probably would be a big help on D.

[PHILA]

Bean, in HIS peak, was an exceptional 2-way player and probably the better all-around player if we're talking pure basketball skills.

He is a better streak scorer and spot up shooter. He has a big advantage in terms of jump shooting period, but Barkley has the edge in passing (especially out of double teams), interior/post scoring, offensive/defensive rebounding, transition/fastbreaks, cutting to the basket, isolation play, drawing fouls (he drew fouls at a higher rate than Shaq), plus he was better at reading the defense. I don't know what you mean by skills, but if you are referring to his moves I will take Barkley as a scorer primarily because he was able to get good shots for himself. I prefer his power game down low over Kobe's spin in place move and 3-4 ineffective pump fakes followed by a contested 20 foot fadeaway.

[bdreason]

I've never heard anyone claim Barkley didn't have any help. You don't make the NBA Finals without help.

[andgar923]

He is a better streak scorer and spot up shooter. He has a big advantage in terms of jump shooting period, but Barkley has the edge in passing (especially out of double teams), interior/post scoring, offensive/defensive rebounding, transition/fastbreaks, cutting to the basket, isolation play, drawing fouls (he drew fouls at a higher rate than Shaq), plus he was better at reading the defense. I don't know what you mean by skills, but if you are referring to his moves I will take Barkley as a scorer primarily because he was able to get good shots for himself. I prefer his power game down low over Kobe's spin in place move and 3-4 ineffective pump fakes followed by a contested 20 foot fadeaway.

This

[greymatter]

I've never heard anyone claim Barkley didn't have any help. You don't make the NBA Finals without help.

His Suns teams were good enough to win it all were it not for the fact that he got injured in the playoffs in 94 and 95. Played through a dislocated shoulder and pulled groin those 2 consecutive years the Suns got bounced by the Rockets.

[iamgine]

I was lining up with 1985-2000 Barkley in place of Kobe on the 1998-2013 Lakers. So 1986 Barkley in 99? Spurs were a really great team at the time, and I wouldn't count on them losing especially since this was before Phil. I don't think 86 Barkley is that much better then 99 to change that series from a sweep to a win. 1991 Barkley in 04? Possibly. Lakers had injuries though and Pistons were really great, so I'm just assuming they won't. Its definitely possible though. I definitely believe 87-89 Barkley wins those 3 titles with Shaq from 00-02.
Umm Kobe entered the league in '97 so it's '87 Barkley in '99.

[Bigsmoke]

He had help in 93, but then he left his prime in 94. So he had a good team for a year in his prime.

Thats really barkleys fault for playing fat in his 30s

[I<3NBA]

an mvp

the greatest shooter of all time

the 2nd greatest shooter of all time

the best defensive player in the 2000s ( dpoty ) ..... twice

the 2nd best defensive player in the 2000's ( dpoty )

the 3rd best defensive player in the 2000's ( dpoty )

and the best defensive player of the 1990's ( dptoy )

a top 5 point guard all time

a top 5-10 clutch shooter all time

another top 5-10 clutch shooter all time ( twice )

and another top 5-10 clutch shooter all time ( twice )

the greatest defensive team in nba history

and a top 5 defensive team ever


---------------------------------

and thats just in the finals



in the playoffs he also faced a top 8-10 all time legend almost every year seemingly... beating him almost twice as many times


da fuq you mean "who kobe face"?
i mean, Kobe never faced MJ. if he did, he would be ringless like Barkley.

[D.J.]

When Barkley emerged in his 2nd year, Moses Malone didn't play a single playoff game and they still were a win away from the ECF. Dr. J was also on his last legs. Then when the older guys left, he had Hersey Hawkins who could score and wasn't a terrible defender, but didn't provide much else. Him and Johnny Dawkins were probably the best after Barkley at that point, which isn't saying much. They overachieved in 1990 mainly because Barkley was shooting 60% from the field and should have been MVP.

The only year Barkley had true help while in his prime was in 1993. But even then, KJ missed almost half the year and the Suns had a higher win percentage without KJ.

[comerb]

I dont hate the guy. I just think his favorite fan needed a reality check


And yes barkley had hall of famers who were old. Young, prime, a bunch of allstars. He has no excuse

Its not like hes f*ckin some dude stuck on the clippers his whole life

His best team was in Jordan's prime. That's really all the excuse you need. He had injuries problems in the latter half us his career

[Bigsmoke]

When Barkley emerged in his 2nd year, Moses Malone didn't play a single playoff game and they still were a win away from the ECF. Dr. J was also on his last legs. Then when the older guys left, he had Hersey Hawkins who could score and wasn't a terrible defender, but didn't provide much else. Him and Johnny Dawkins were probably the best after Barkley at that point, which isn't saying much. They overachieved in 1990 mainly because Barkley was shooting 60% from the field and should have been MVP.

The only year Barkley had true help while in his prime was in 1993. But even then, KJ missed almost half the year and the Suns had a higher win percentage without KJ.

Wasnt mo cheeks averaging 20\7 in the playoffs that year:coleman:

[KG215]

When Barkley emerged in his 2nd year, Moses Malone didn't play a single playoff game and they still were a win away from the ECF. Dr. J was also on his last legs. Then when the older guys left, he had Hersey Hawkins who could score and wasn't a terrible defender, but didn't provide much else. Him and Johnny Dawkins were probably the best after Barkley at that point, which isn't saying much. They overachieved in 1990 mainly because Barkley was shooting 60% from the field and should have been MVP.

The only year Barkley had true help while in his prime was in 1993. But even then, KJ missed almost half the year and the Suns had a higher win percentage without KJ.
And Barkley had more 1st place votes than Magic, too. And not just 1 or 2 more, either...pretty sure it was at least 10 more 1st place votes.

Led Hawkins, Dawkins, and Gminiski (a pretty average supporting cast) to 53 wins and a playoff series win to top it off.

[JellyBean]

I am still trying to figure out why its consider crazy. Barkley didn't have help! The Suns didn't have a dominate post player, wing, or defensive stopper. They had KJ and Marjele....but really? Philly days were a joke. Barkley did the best with what he had. He came into the league with marginal expectations and got better. He got motivated. But he made the best of his career.

[joeyjoejoe]

Barkley could of been mvp in 90 but don't have a problem with magic getting it as they put up similar numbers but Lakers had a much better record, as for 93 suns they were loaded with the likes of Barkley, kj, chambers, majerle, ainge and some decent players like dumas, ceballos, west, Miller they were favorites heading into the finals against the bulls

[D.J.]

And Barkley had more 1st place votes than Magic, too. And not just 1 or 2 more, either...pretty sure it was at least 10 more 1st place votes.

Led Hawkins, Dawkins, and Gminiski (a pretty average supporting cast) to 53 wins and a playoff series win to top it off.


38-27. If I recall correctly, one voter had him 5th and the other left him off completely.