Charles Barkley vs Dirk Nowitzki...Who Was The Better Player?

[Round Mound]

:coleman:

[Dr Hawk]

Dirk. Not a liability on defense

[winwin]

Barkley and not even close

[dhsilv]

player and peak? Barkley and yeah not close. Career goes to Dirk and better player if we take into account years of play? Still going with sir charles but it's closer.

[Rocketswin2013]

The guy who didn't underachieve with good rosters most of his career.

[Fire Colangelo]

Peak for peak probably Barkley. But taken in account of their careers? Dirk.

But for questions like these, I always ask myself: "who would I draft if I were to start a franchise?"

The answer is Dirk.

[tontoz]

Hard to imagine two guys playing the same position being more different.

People who didn't see him wouldn't believe what a dominant post scorer Barkley was. When MJ played on the Olympic team he said Barkley was the best player there and Jordan didn't give compliments to competitors often. Barkley was completely unguardable 1 on 1 in the post. Explosive athlete even though he was frequently fat and out of shape.

He wasn't a hard worker, was a defensive liability and didn't age that well.

Dirk is arguably the best jump shooting big man ever. With no quickness to speak of he had to shoot with guys right in his face most of the time and still made them. His ability to shoot really opened up the floor for his teammates. Certainly the best stretch 4 ever and was huge in the playoffs as well. Great longevity.

I like both guys. Hard to choose between them.

[Round Mound]

Dirk. Not a liability on defense

When Chuck had a decent defensive center in Moses (unlike Malone who had Eaton and Duncan who had Robinson) he was 7th in Defensive Rating. Chuck was a lazy defnder but he was quite good a defender when he wanted to be. Dirk isn`t a great defender either. He is a great shooter, thats about the only thing he has over Chuck. :confusedshrug:

[LoneyROY7]

Dirk.

[Round Mound]

Dirk is a better far range shooter and FT shooter thats about it.

Dirk could only dream of being a better post player, inside scorer, rebounder, passer, ballhander, stealer flood defender and even shot blocker as Sixers Barkley was.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-uuEvACs7v4

[Milbuck]

Dirk is 6th all time in scoring, is an MVP, 13 time all-star, carried the Mavs to 50+ wins for 11 straight years, and beat Kobe, Durant, and Lebron in a dominant championship run as the sole star on his team...but yeah, he's "not even close" to Barkley.

:facepalm

[Round Mound]

Dirk is 6th all time in scoring, is an MVP, 13 time all-star, carried the Mavs to 50+ wins for 11 straight years, and beat Kobe, Durant, and Lebron in a dominant championship run as the sole all-star on his team...but yeah, he's "not even close" to Barkley.

:facepalm

Scoring wise he is close to Barkley but nothing else much after that :confusedshrug:

[DMAVS41]

Very close, but I think Dirk.

Dirk played smarter imo and was better on defense. Dirk also cared more...he was a better teammate and made life easier on a coach...not harder.

Very very very close though...could go either way.

[DMAVS41]

Scoring wise he is close to Barkley but nothing else much after that :confusedshrug:

Flawed way to look at it, but also just false.

Dirk was a better teammate, better defender, and trumps Barkley in off ball impact.

[Black and White]

Personally I would take Dirk, but I have no problem with someone picking Charles, this is a good debate to have.

[Milbuck]

Scoring wise he is close to Barkley but nothing else much after that :confusedshrug:
Cool story. Barkley being so much better at everything else surely led his team to more success than Dirk right?

[LoneyROY7]

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/79/bc/c6/79bcc6bdf996616aef55153e53006128.jpg

[dhsilv]

Very close, but I think Dirk.

Dirk played smarter imo and was better on defense. Dirk also cared more...he was a better teammate and made life easier on a coach...not harder.

Very very very close though...could go either way.

Who were charle's coaches? What about the franchise he was on (talking philly). I'm not saying Dirk got all the breaks but in this comparison he got a lot more of them.

I really wish we'd gotten to see charles with a solid roster in his actual prime.

Though yeah Dirk was by far the smarter player. All those 3's charles took...seriously?

[feyki]

Barkley has better prime (89-94) . They draw on peak , 06 and 93 really close to me . Barkley has short and inconsistency career when compare to Dirk's . Dirk has slightly better career . 02-07 Dirk was also better defender than prime Barkley . They have equal offence . Barkley has rebounding and playmaking for sure . And He was monster on finishing at the rim . Dirk was more skilled offensive player , has far better shooting , higher volume scorer in playoffs .

Career - Dirk

Peak - Draw

Prime - Barkley

[Young X]

Cool story. Barkley being so much better at everything else surely led his team to more success than Dirk right?Barkley had to go up against the Bulls.

[DMAVS41]

Who were charle's coaches? What about the franchise he was on (talking philly). I'm not saying Dirk got all the breaks but in this comparison he got a lot more of them.

I really wish we'd gotten to see charles with a solid roster in his actual prime.

Though yeah Dirk was by far the smarter player. All those 3's charles took...seriously?

But I'm not saying that Barkley should have had more success or something. I've talked about how great he was in the 93 finals and how in a lot of ways it's simply unfair he doesn't have a ring that year.

t'm talking about his personality....he wasn't a very smart person or player imo. He also was a loud distraction at times throughout his career.

Again, I have no issue with someone taking Charles...he was better than Dirk at his very best imo...or at least he was capable of more.

I just don't think it is a rational or logical opinion to claim it's not close between them.

[LoneyROY7]

http://i.cdn.turner.com/nba/nba/teamsites/images/legacy/suns/barkley_index_040320.jpg

[dhsilv]

Barkley has better prime (89-94) . They draw on peak , 06 and 93 really close to me . Barkley has short and inconsistency career when compare to Dirk's . Dirk has slightly better career . 02-07 Dirk was also better defender than prime Barkley . They have equal offence . Barkley has rebounding and playmaking for sure . And He was monster on finishing at the rim . Dirk was more skilled offensive player , has far better shooting , higher volume scorer in playoffs .

Career - Dirk

Peak - Draw

Prime - Barkley

93 really wasn't Barkley's peak. He was by his own admission a better player in Philly and he was just off the charts crazy good 89-91..missed games in 91 but you pick the year in that sample. You can talk playoffs and talk yourself in 93, but I think that was more about his teamates being just VASTLY better. I mean Hersey Hawkins was a solid guy but beyond that? Mike Gminski was a legit top 3 guy on a playoff team for Charles.

[DMAVS41]

The PF list comes out and you see the KG and Barkley fans all upset, but this is what rational and objective people have been saying a long time now.

That after Duncan...there just isn't much separation here.

You could order them in many different ways...

Just obvious

[Hamtaro CP3KDKG]

GOAT midrange scorer VS GOAT inside scorer
Chuck the better rebounder overall but defensively the boards are close. Chuck has better ballhandling and playmaking but Dirk gets more hockey assists from his offball game which outside of Bird, Dirk might have the GOAT offball game which def makes up for Chucks better onball skills with handling and making plays, has the nastiest spacing effect ever, barely turns it over and is the better defender

Dirks also more clutch, loyal and less complacent, could be a cornerstone more reliably

[dhsilv]

But I'm not saying that Barkley should have had more success or something. I've talked about how great he was in the 93 finals and how in a lot of ways it's simply unfair he doesn't have a ring that year.

t'm talking about his personality....he wasn't a very smart person or player imo. He also was a loud distraction at times throughout his career.

Again, I have no issue with someone taking Charles...he was better than Dirk at his very best imo...or at least he was capable of more.

I just don't think it is a rational or logical opinion to claim it's not close between them.

I said their peak wasn't close, I fully think Dirk had the better career and I'm drafting him over Barkley. Now player over their careers, I happen to marginally give it to Barkley but I think dirk's going to last a few more years and flip that.

But back to his issues. IMO I think he was a much more mature and focused player once he went to the suns. He was a guy who got frustrated and upset over his situation. Sure there's a lack of maturity, but if he'd had the sun's player in 88 through 91, his career would be seen completely differently. He'd have wins over Magic's lakers. He might have a ring or two. He had a bad team and he let it get to him.

Sure I'm doing the crappy revisionist history game here, but I'm not asking you to forgive it. I'm just bringing this into the discussion as a great what if. It's something I've always wondered because he was just SOOOOOO good those years and with better teammates...he'd both be seen as a different player but more importantly he might have just been one.

[deja vu]

Anybody who says Dirk hasn't seen Sir Charles play.

[dhsilv]

Anybody who says Dirk hasn't seen Sir Charles play.

Dirk right now vs Barkley on the rockets?

[DMAVS41]

I said their peak wasn't close, I fully think Dirk had the better career and I'm drafting him over Barkley. Now player over their careers, I happen to marginally give it to Barkley but I think dirk's going to last a few more years and flip that.

But back to his issues. IMO I think he was a much more mature and focused player once he went to the suns. He was a guy who got frustrated and upset over his situation. Sure there's a lack of maturity, but if he'd had the sun's player in 88 through 91, his career would be seen completely differently. He'd have wins over Magic's lakers. He might have a ring or two. He had a bad team and he let it get to him.

Sure I'm doing the crappy revisionist history game here, but I'm not asking you to forgive it. I'm just bringing this into the discussion as a great what if. It's something I've always wondered because he was just SOOOOOO good those years and with better teammates...he'd both be seen as a different player but more importantly he might have just been one.

I wasn't accusing you of doing that...I was just saying in general people that say that stuff simply shouldn't be acknowledged much.

Anyone that begins a post with "KG is the 2nd best PF ever and it's not close" or "Barkley was better than Dirk and it's not close"...should just be laughed off.

Like with many great players that didn't win a lot...putting Barkley, KG, Dirk...etc. on loaded teams with great coaching in their primes...they'd be thought of as better players...in some cases considerably so.

Just the way it goes...which is why I tend to avoid success as a big part of an argument unless the circumstances were very similar...and in most cases they aren't.

[JohnnySic]

Barkley at his peak was better.

[Milbuck]

Barkley had to go up against the Bulls.
Dirk beat Kobe, Lebron, Durant, Wade, and Westbrook in the same playoff run.

[Hamtaro CP3KDKG]

Dirk beat Kobe, Lebron, and Durant in the same playoff run.
Wade, Westbrook, Aldridge, Pau and Bosh as well

[Odinn]

BTW, Chuck should be 2nd. He won a well-deserved MVP against prime/peak Jordan and Hakeem. Also he could have won it in 1989-90 season against prime/peak Jordan and Magic, he's the only player in the history that got most 1st place votes but hadn't won the award.
He was that good. Karl Malone was never that good. I don't see Dirk winning an MVP against Jordan and Hakeem. Also Jordan needed to drop 41 ppg to defeat Chuck in 1993.

We are talking about level of play and accolades, Chuck is better in both criterias. He had the better level of play and his MVP results are better in a more challenging era.
:cheers: :cheers:

[LBJFTW]

Barkley was a lazy bastard. He use to ride the stationary bike on the sidelines while eating pancakes yelling at his team during practice while bits of pancakes flew out of his mouth.

[Young X]

Dirk beat Kobe, Lebron, Durant, Wade, and Westbrook in the same playoff run.Yeah and none of them are even touching prime Michael Jordan.

[raprap]

Flip a coin. I prefer Dirk tho.

[Round Mound]

Barkley was the superior player clearly. Dirk was lucky he played in this soft era.

[DMAVS41]

Barkley was the superior player clearly. Dirk was lucky he played in this soft era.

:rockon:

[ArbitraryWater]

Yeah and none of them are even touching prime Michael Jordan.

Barkley was a BS call away from getting bounced in the first round by the 8th seed Lakers, and then had overcame the Sonics in a heavily scrutinized game 7 with bad officiating.

Dirk climbed more of an uphill battle in 2011 than Barkley ever did, and in the 2006 Spurs beat another team that I would take over any team Barkley beat.

[Pointguard]

Very close, but I think Dirk.

Dirk played smarter imo and was better on defense. Dirk also cared more...he was a better teammate and made life easier on a coach...not harder.

Very very very close though...could go either way.
That's my main reason for giving it to Dirk. Barkley at his peak, was scary good. Could play at that exceptional rarefied air. But he just didn't care enough to keep doing it. I really believe he could have been a top three player all time. Dirk was the opposite, consistent, always ready, well integrated and always stuck with his strengths.

[stalkerforlife]

Dirk.

Period.

Carries teams better. Actually a better defender. Dirk and them boys had no business winning that ring against the most stacked team in NBA history.

Dirk is a better winner.

[Fallen Angel]

Dirk, really surprised people are debating about it

[Human Error]

Nowitzki. Equally good on offense and better / more versatile on defense.

[catch24]

Tossup.

At his absolute best, Barkley was scary good. Tough, physical, could score with the best of them (save for Jordan) and rebounded better than Dirk...a lot better.

Dirk's advantages = shooting, crunch-time play, better teammate, and that he's better on defense although not by much.

I'd argue Dirk for career, and Barkley in his prime.

[Fallen Angel]

When did Dirk become an inferior scorer compared to Barkley?

[Asukal]

It's close but I'll take Dirk. :rockon:

[Fallen Angel]

I'd take Barkley for his rebounding and transition game, that's about it.

Nowitzki has the better resume as a scorer, as a winner, and as a leader (on and off the floor).

Both are shit defenders, but Nowitzki isn't as shitty as Barkley.

[OldSchoolBBall]

I'd go with Barkley over an extended prime (4-6 years), with the caveat that Dirk's 2011 run (especially postseason) was one of the most amazing things I've ever seen - he was playing at a higher level in those playoffs than Barkley ever reached imo.

Barkley imo gives you more: equal/higher scoring on better efficiency, far better rebounding, better passing, ballhandling, and a more dynamic player who needed to be game-planned for more and who could affect the game in more dramatic ways. I don't think Dirk is much better than Barkley on defense if at all.

[Bandito]

Scoring wise he is close to Barkley but nothing else much after that :confusedshrug:
Won a ring while beating top 10 players in his way while being clutch and dominant. But nothing else after that:facepalm

[tontoz]

When did Dirk become an inferior scorer compared to Barkley?


Barley averaged 28 ppg one season while leading the league in scoring efficiency.He followed that up with 2 25 ppg seasons while leading the league in efficiency.

Barkley's peak years as a scorer > Dirk's peak as several have already mentioned.

[Round Mound]

Charles was considered the 2nd Best Player in the League after Jordan in 1992 by most people.

(1992 Before Olympics: In Italian "For The Majority, The 2nd Best Player in The League After Michael Jordan etc")

Minute 2:44 = https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kiNvY93EmWc

Dirk was never the best player in his position: Garnett and Duncan where early on.

[dhsilv]

I wasn't accusing you of doing that...I was just saying in general people that say that stuff simply shouldn't be acknowledged much.

Anyone that begins a post with "KG is the 2nd best PF ever and it's not close" or "Barkley was better than Dirk and it's not close"...should just be laughed off.

Like with many great players that didn't win a lot...putting Barkley, KG, Dirk...etc. on loaded teams with great coaching in their primes...they'd be thought of as better players...in some cases considerably so.

Just the way it goes...which is why I tend to avoid success as a big part of an argument unless the circumstances were very similar...and in most cases they aren't.

Hey look some of us want a bit of journalistic flair (20 years ago those words wouldn't go together but welcome to the 2000's). Anyway, the point being if you weight things your way it's ok to think one is way better than another imo.

But with Barkley I'm not asking you to give him a stacked team. I'm asking you to give him KJ and a decent shooting guard. A decent coach. Give him that and I think you get far more out of him.

Some players in history were hard workers who just got stuff done. Charles isn't that guy. He was amazing but he was also lazy. Given better teammates he would have been more mature because he had more at stake. At least I think so. I don't think the gap in his basketball iq and dirks is as great as the results we saw were in other words. Nor their effort given they had players around them that mattered.

[dhsilv]

Charles was considered the 2nd Best Player in the League after Jordan in 1992 by most people.

(1992 Before Olympics: In Italian "For The Majority, The 2nd Best Player in The League After Michael Jordan etc")

Minute 2:44 = https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kiNvY93EmWc

Dirk was never the best player in his position: Garnett and Duncan where early on.

I'm not a super super KG fan so I don't know his career as well as i'd like, but in 06 dirk was better than duncan, period. Duncan took that title back in 07 but still Dirk had his year.

[Cold soul]

This has to be Dirk.

[Young X]

Barkley was a BS call away from getting bounced in the first round by the 8th seed Lakers, and then had overcame the Sonics in a heavily scrutinized game 7 with bad officiating.

Dirk climbed more of an uphill battle in 2011 than Barkley ever did, and in the 2006 Spurs beat another team that I would take over any team Barkley beat.I'm not trying to argue who was better or whose run was more impressive.

But bringing up team success/rings? Barkley had to face the f*cking Bulls in the finals. Dirk didn't have to deal with anything close to that.

Barkley had 42/13 in game 2. Normally that would be good enough right? Nope, MJ one-upped him with 42/13/9 and the Bulls won.

Game 4? Barkley had a 30 point triple double. MJ? 55 on 21-37 shooting. Bulls won.

Barkley's finals series against the Bulls was far better than either of Dirk's finals series. Difference is he ran into the GOAT. Those Mavs teams aren't beating the Bulls either.

[dhsilv]

I'm not trying to argue who was better or whose run was more impressive.

But bringing up team success/rings? Barkley had to face the f*cking Bulls in the finals. Dirk didn't have to deal with anything close to that.

Barkley had 42/13 in game 2. Normally that would be good enough right? Nope, MJ one-upped him with 42/13/9 and the Bulls won.

Game 4? Barkley had a 30 point triple double. MJ? 55 on 21-37 shooting. Bulls won.

Barkley's finals series against the Bulls was far better than either of Dirk's finals series. Difference is he ran into the GOAT. Those Mavs teams aren't beating the Bulls either.

i mean lets drop rings for a second, Barkley go out of the first round 8 times vs dirk's 7. He got out of the second around 3 times to dirk's 3 times. Dirk has two finals to his 1.

Of course barkley made the conference finals as rookie and that wasn't on him and made the conference finals again in 97 on a rockets team that by the 8 year old's here would call a "stacked" team or whatever else the kids call it today.

regular season in games played

Charles 600-391 60.054%
Dirk 834-468 64.06%

Depending on how you handle their careers, you can go different directions on success. Overall Dirk has an edge imo, but by all means counter.

[ArbitraryWater]

I'm not trying to argue who was better or whose run was more impressive.

But bringing up team success/rings? Barkley had to face the f*cking Bulls in the finals. Dirk didn't have to deal with anything close to that.

Barkley had 42/13 in game 2. Normally that would be good enough right? Nope, MJ one-upped him with 42/13/9 and the Bulls won.

Game 4? Barkley had a 30 point triple double. MJ? 55 on 21-37 shooting. Bulls won.

Barkley's finals series against the Bulls was far better than either of Dirk's finals series. Difference is he ran into the GOAT. Those Mavs teams aren't beating the Bulls either.

no shit...and is Chuck beating LAL, OKC, or MIA? The difference in that run was Dirk's godly clutch run. Arguably the most impressive clutch showing ever.

Its not about "ringz!" its what Dirk did that playoff run, which is better than Barkley ever did. You answered with "muh Jordan".

--

^

that first round thing is bullshit..

lets forget it ignores all context for a sec, Dirk just carried some rosters into the playoffs for 2 straight years at his age which was an accomplishment in and of itself...

[Young X]

no shit...and is Chuck beating LAL, OKC, or MIA? The difference in that run was Dirk's godly clutch run. Arguably the most impressive clutch showing ever.

Its not about "ringz!" its what Dirk did that playoff run, which is better than Barkley ever did. You answered with "muh Jordan".My response was strictly to the rings argument. Dirk isn't getting a ring playing those Bulls teams either. That's all I'm saying. Jordan averaged 40+ PPG in 2 different series against Barkley's teams.

[catch24]

My response was strictly to the rings argument. Dirk isn't getting a ring playing those Bulls teams either. That's all I'm saying. Jordan averaged 40+ PPG in 2 different series against Barkley's teams.

I don't think anybody is suggesting otherwise. What Arbitrary's saying, or so I think (this guy is harder to read than a hungry parrot), is Dirk having that playoff run = greater than anything Barkley ever accomplished.

Me? I'm on record saying Barkley had the better peak/prime, but the career stuff is easier to argue with that 2011 playoff run and subsequent finals mvp.

[ArbitraryWater]

My response was strictly to the rings argument. Dirk isn't getting a ring playing those Bulls teams either. That's all I'm saying. Jordan averaged 40+ PPG in 2 different series against Barkley's teams.

Whats wrong with the ring stuff? Flaunting rings when the player being compared has never had as good of a playoff run seems valid :confusedshrug:

Believe, Dirk didn't have it any easier considering help/competition, even if Barkley had MJ in his era, to who'm he lost once (?), twice it seems.


I don't think anybody is suggesting otherwise. What Arbitrary's saying, or so I think (this guy is harder to read than a hungry parrot), is Dirk having that playoff run = greater than anything Barkley ever accomplished.

I believe I made that quite clear, don't think that was his problem.

[catch24]

Whats wrong with the ring stuff? Flaunting rings when the player being compared has never had as good of a playoff run seems valid :confusedshrug:

Believe, Dirk didn't have it any easier considering help/competition, even if Barkley had MJ in his era, to who'm he lost once (?), twice it seems.



I believe I made that quite clear, don't think that was his problem.

Yeah, I'm not sure where the confusion is then. :confusedshrug:

Barkley had more opportunities to beat a GOAT-less team too. Phoenix also squandered their chances against Hakeem and his Rockets.

[ArbitraryWater]

Yeah, I'm not sure what the confusion is then. :confusedshrug:

Barkley had more opportunities to beat a GOAT-less team. The Suns squandered their opportunities against Hakeem as well.

Yeah... he even had a near bagel in one of those games against the Rockets. Lost two series' up 3-1? Or one 3-1 and the other 2-0 with HC in games 3 and 4... now thats kinda crazy (in addition played underwhelmingly individually).

[dhsilv]

Whats wrong with the ring stuff? Flaunting rings when the player being compared has never had as good of a playoff run seems valid :confusedshrug:

Believe, Dirk didn't have it any easier considering help/competition, even if Barkley had MJ in his era, to who'm he lost once (?), twice it seems.



I believe I made that quite clear, don't think that was his problem.

3 losses to MJ
1 loss to bird
2 losses to dream

If we're talking about loses to all time greats that's 6 losses to people most rank in the top 12.

[houston]

The guy who didn't underachieve with good rosters most of his career.


funny co sign

[Round Mound]

Would Dirk Nowitzki be seen as the 2nd best player in the world with players like Magic Johnson, Larry Bird, Michael Jordan, Hakeem Olajuwon, David Robinson, Karl Malone, Patrick Ewing, Isiah Thomas, Scottie Pippen, John Stockton? :confusedshrug: I dont think so :no: Chuck is easily the 2nd greatest PF after prime Duncan.

[24-Inch_Chrome]

I'll take Chuck.

[Sarcastic]

Anybody who says Dirk hasn't seen Sir Charles play.

Pretty much. Dirk has the longer career, and got a ring because Lebron tanked. It's the difference between the Jordan era and the Bron era. But Barkley's peak and prime is superior to Dirk.

[pastis]

Dirk Nowitzki.
Everyone who says otherwise, didnt watch dirk during his prime on a regular basis (argument from barkley fans)

round mound, why are you comparing dirk and barkley. make a thread about barley and malone, barkley and KG, charles and mchale. always about dirk.

[Round Mound]

Dirk Nowitzki.
Everyone who say otherwise, didnt watch dirk during his prime on a regular basis (argument from barkley fans)

round mound, why are you comparing dirk and barkley. make a thread baout charley and malone, charles and KG, charles and mchale. alwayabout dirks.

:wtf:

I`ve never made a thread about Dirk but this one! Clearly you are a Dirk fan and you feel threated as older posters show how good really was prime and healthy Barkley.

Other than FT and Far Range shooting i see no other skills that Dirk has over Barkley. I did get to see Prime Barkley play btw.

[Odinn]

Peak to peak? As much as I like Dirk, it's Chuck. No contest tbh.

[StephHamann]

Charles was considered the 2nd Best Player in the League after Jordan in 1992 by most people.

(1992 Before Olympics: In Italian "For The Majority, The 2nd Best Player in The League After Michael Jordan etc")

Minute 2:44 = https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kiNvY93EmWc

Dirk was never the best player in his position: Garnett and Duncan where early on.

See the difference is, Barkley was considered 2nd best by the Media/Fans, while Dirk was clearly the best player in the world in 2011.

[dhsilv]

:wtf:

I`ve never made a thread about Dirk but this one! Clearly you are a Dirk fan and you feel threated as older posters show how good really was prime and healthy Barkley.

Other than FT and Far Range shooting i see no other skills that Dirk has over Barkley. I did get to see Prime Barkley play btw.

Dirk leveraged his strengths better than charles and his off ball play is just night and day better and one of his biggest skills. I'm still take barkley but you're making this seem far more lopsided than it actually is.

[Round Mound]

See the difference is, Barkley was considered 2nd best by the Media/Fans, while Dirk was clearly the best player in the world in 2011.

Barkley was the most hated player by the media and fans during his playing days in Phily (untill he played with the Suns) so much that he was robbed from the 1990 MVP having more 1st place votes than any other player (nothing like this ever happened before). Clearly Barkley was a more dominant player than Dirk. Its just that simple.

[SexSymbol]

Dirk by a wide margin.
A much better offensive player, ten times higher basketball IQ, better defender too.
Career-wise this isn't even a question, Dirk has a ring and one of the best PO performances of all time.
Dirk is also much more dominant, Barkley never really impacted a team greatly, because of his horrible shortcomings on defense.

[penny4president]

the one with the ring

[90sgoat]

Barkley and it isn't close.

Dirk is a great scorer and that's it. One dimensional. His 2011 has as much to do with J.Kidd who led the team in win shares in the finals.

If you think Lebron is better than Dirk, then you think Barkley is better than Dirk.

Barkley is one of those positionless all time all around players. Barkley could get you 33 rebounds (first Rockets game), 16 offensive rebounds (career high) 56 points (playoff high), 14 assist (career high), 7 steals, 7 blocks (career high).

That kind of versality coupled with ALL TIME great rebounding is simply remarkable for a 6'6'' player.

Barkley is first of all one of the 3-4 best rebounders of all time (Wilt, Rodman, Moses, Barkley). He is also one of the most efficient scorers of all time, able to score in every single way, from the fast break, to post up, to mid range and the occasional 3. Led the league in 2pt% for 5 years straight, while Michael Jordan played.

He is an excellent, one of the best, post passers in history - averaging almost 5 apg on multiple occasions.

Career best regular season: 26-12-5-2
Career best playoff: 27-14-4-2

That kind of playoff statline in 24 games (!) is ALL TIME great.

In comparison Lebron's best playoff season is 30-10-6-2 in a weaker era. Barkley gives you 4 more rebounds, Lebron gives you 3 more points and 1.5 more assits.

It's a wash? Efficiency is strikingly similar.

This is what I've been saying.

Barkley is not just some run of the mill great scorer like Dantley/Dirk, he is an all time great, his playoff stats, versatility and impact is FULLY on the level of Lebron.

Barkley is one ring away from being right outside the top 10 of all time.

Peak wise, very very few come close to Sir Charles. He was the damn top scorer on the Dream Team!

Dirk is great, but he is a scorer and not much else. Barkley does everything else.

[Round Mound]

Barkley and it isn't close.

Dirk is a great scorer and that's it. One dimensional. His 2011 has as much to do with J.Kidd who led the team in win shares in the finals.

If you think Lebron is better than Dirk, then you think Barkley is better than Dirk.

Barkley is one of those positionless all time all around players. Barkley could get you 33 rebounds (first Rockets game), 16 offensive rebounds (career high) 56 points (playoff high), 14 assist (career high), 7 steals, 7 blocks (career high).

That kind of versality coupled with ALL TIME great rebounding is simply remarkable for a 6'6'' player.

Barkley is first of all one of the 3-4 best rebounders of all time (Wilt, Rodman, Moses, Barkley). He is also one of the most efficient scorers of all time, able to score in every single way, from the fast break, to post up, to mid range and the occasional 3. Led the league in 2pt% for 5 years straight, while Michael Jordan played.

He is an excellent, one of the best, post passers in history - averaging almost 5 apg on multiple occasions.

Career best regular season: 26-12-5-2
Career best playoff: 27-14-4-2

That kind of playoff statline in 24 games (!) is ALL TIME great.

In comparison Lebron's best playoff season is 30-10-6-2 in a weaker era. Barkley gives you 4 more rebounds, Lebron gives you 3 more points and 1.5 more assits.

It's a wash? Efficiency is strikingly similar.

This is what I've been saying.

Barkley is not just some run of the mill great scorer like Dantley/Dirk, he is an all time great, his playoff stats, versatility and impact is FULLY on the level of Lebron.

Barkley is one ring away from being right outside the top 10 of all time.

Peak wise, very very few come close to Sir Charles. He was the damn top scorer on the Dream Team!

Dirk is great, but he is a scorer and not much else. Barkley does everything else.

:applause:

[feyki]

90's ;

Nice post for Barkley'S greatness . But you did underestimate Dirk .

Barkley has better prime than Dirk for me too . But Dirk had better scoring,better shooting, better defending than prime Barkley and with x2 longer career and with great consistency .

Barkley had nearly 25-10 llevel Kevin Johnson and didn't make the finals , eliminated by Rox in his prime at b2b playoffs .

[Round Mound]

90's ;

Nice post for Barkley'S greatness . But you did underestimate Dirk .

Barkley has better prime than Dirk for me too . But Dirk had better scoring,better shooting, better defending than prime Barkley and with x2 longer career and with great consistency .

Barkley had nearly 25-10 llevel Kevin Johnson and didn't make the finals , eliminated by Rox in his prime at b2b playoffs .

Chuck was a Better Scorer Per Shot Taken than Dirk was: Chuck Lead the League in 2-point FG% 5 Times In A Row at over 25 PPG (He Was Shaq-like in his Prime). Dirk was a Better Outside Long Range Shooter and Mid Range Shooter than Chuck: so I do give credit to Dirk that was his game but Chuck is the Better Pure Scorer, Post Player, Rebounder, Passer, Ballhandler, End to End Player, Floor Defender, Stealer and Almost as Good Shot Blocker than Dirk was.

KJ was good but he was a 1st Drive-Score Then Pass PG. KJ shot 42% FG in the 1993 NBA finals while Chuck was doing this 27-13-5.5 (1 assist less pg than KJ in the Finals) on 48% FG and KJ only played 49 games the 1992-93 Season and the Suns still had a Great Record and made the Finals, thanks to Chucks amazing 7 game vs Sonics.

Chuck in his peak was more of a complete player than Dirk.

[90sgoat]

KJ would have thrived today.

Barkley actually put down KJ somewhat on an Inside NBA/roundtable show on NBA tv I watched. Said he would have loved to play with a great point guard like Stockton, to which Webber said: KJ wasn't great? And Barkley replied: Of course, but I mean a real pass first point guard. You're right about that I think.

[D. Toretto]

Clearly Dirk for me. Love the humbleness and love the rainbow triples.

[feyki]

Chuck was a Better Scorer Per Shot Taken than Dirk was: Chuck Lead the League in 2-point FG% 5 Times In A Row at over 25 PPG (He Was Shaq-like in his Prime). Dirk was a Better Outside Long Range Shooter and Mid Range Shooter than Chuck: so I do give credit to Dirk that was his game but Chuck is the Better Pure Scorer, Post Player, Rebounder, Passer, Ballhandler, End to End Player, Floor Defender, Stealer and Almost as Good Shot Blocker than Dirk was.

KJ was good but he was a 1st Drive-Score Then Pass PG. KJ shot 42% FG in the 1993 NBA finals while Chuck was doing this 27-13-5.5 (1 assist less pg than KJ in the Finals) on 48% FG and KJ only played 49 games the 1992-93 Season and the Suns still had a Great Record and made the Finals, thanks to Chucks amazing 7 game vs Sonics.

Chuck in his peak was more of a complete player than Dirk.

I agree with those , beside of defensive stuffs .

You're right on 93 playoffs . KJ didn't played good for his level totally and he choked in last 5 minutes of the finals . Barkley took 4-5 offensive rebounds and create shooting positon for his teammates , specially for KJ . But they didn't damn mid range .

But other side , Dirk had great 2006 playoffs too . Don't underestimate he did beat the 05 and 07 Champion Spurs with 27-13-3 , %65 TS and with solid defence . He did beat the b2b mvp and b2b 60 wins team with 28-14-4 .

Barkley was great . But Dirk was too .

[DMAVS41]

Peak to peak? As much as I like Dirk, it's Chuck. No contest tbh.

Then it's no contest with Duncan.

Because peak Dirk was capable of at least equaling Duncan in a series.

I think Duncan was better, of course, but if we are going with "no contest"...then in order for you to stay consistent...then you'd have to take Barkley over Duncan...which I don't think you'd do.

There was never a time in which Dirk and Duncan were play their best basketball...and it was just "no contest"...

[dhsilv]

Then it's no contest with Duncan.

Because peak Dirk was capable of at least equaling Duncan in a series.

I think Duncan was better, of course, but if we are going with "no contest"...then in order for you to stay consistent...then you'd have to take Barkley over Duncan...which I don't think you'd do.

There was never a time in which Dirk and Duncan were play their best basketball...and it was just "no contest"...

if charles didn't chuck stupid 3's and try and do too much at the end of games, I think you could make a very good argument that he was better than Duncan. However he was a guy who kept making stupid decisions...

[raiderfan19]

Barkley and it isn't close.

Dirk is a great scorer and that's it. One dimensional. His 2011 has as much to do with J.Kidd who led the team in win shares in the finals.

If you think Lebron is better than Dirk, then you think Barkley is better than Dirk.

Barkley is one of those positionless all time all around players. Barkley could get you 33 rebounds (first Rockets game), 16 offensive rebounds (career high) 56 points (playoff high), 14 assist (career high), 7 steals, 7 blocks (career high).

That kind of versality coupled with ALL TIME great rebounding is simply remarkable for a 6'6'' player.

Barkley is first of all one of the 3-4 best rebounders of all time (Wilt, Rodman, Moses, Barkley). He is also one of the most efficient scorers of all time, able to score in every single way, from the fast break, to post up, to mid range and the occasional 3. Led the league in 2pt% for 5 years straight, while Michael Jordan played.

He is an excellent, one of the best, post passers in history - averaging almost 5 apg on multiple occasions.

Career best regular season: 26-12-5-2
Career best playoff: 27-14-4-2

That kind of playoff statline in 24 games (!) is ALL TIME great.

In comparison Lebron's best playoff season is 30-10-6-2 in a weaker era. Barkley gives you 4 more rebounds, Lebron gives you 3 more points and 1.5 more assits.

It's a wash? Efficiency is strikingly similar.

This is what I've been saying.

Barkley is not just some run of the mill great scorer like Dantley/Dirk, he is an all time great, his playoff stats, versatility and impact is FULLY on the level of Lebron.

Barkley is one ring away from being right outside the top 10 of all time.

Peak wise, very very few come close to Sir Charles. He was the damn top scorer on the Dream Team!

Dirk is great, but he is a scorer and not much else. Barkley does everything else.
First, this isn't a weaker era than barkleys. This is without question the most talented the league has ever been due to the advances in medicine and training prolonging careers and the extra avenues available to find players(this doesn't mean the teams are the best ever due to expansion)

Individually, both players had 12 year primes which are pretty clearly statistically delineated from the rest of their careers. During those 12 year primes Barkley avged 24/12/4/1.7/.9 on 54.7/27.1/73.1 with 3.3 Topg.

Dirk avged 24/9/3/.9/1.0 on 47.8/38.4/88.3 on 2.0 Topg. Chuck has a rebounding edge(largely from where they played on the court, dirk was an elite defensive rebounder early) a small edge in assists and a big edge in steals from gambling. Dirk has big edges in 3pt and ft %s. Nothing all that earth shattering about those numbers other than to point out that the scoring point really doesn't hold any water. Dirk also avged 34 pts per 100 poss to chucks 31.5. So chucks numbers need to be adjusted down a hair for pace.

Outside of those 12 years dirk has a pretty big edge. Dirk has already played nearly 300 more games than chuck and remains the best player on a playoff team which brings up the big difference between the two. Despite barkleys edge in assists dirk has gotten more players open looks that weren't assists than probably anyone in league history. All stars have gravity and Barkley definitely got others looks by drawing doubles. But dirk is the most effective screener in league history. There's a reason every guard he plays with looks better than they are(see terry, Ellis, mayo, dwill) As for career highs showing versatility, dirks career highs are something like 53/23/10/8/7 not quite chucks but not bad either.

There is an argument to be made for chuck but it damn sure isn't "not close"

[raiderfan19]

I love dirk but arguing someone vs dirk and vs Duncan has a really huge difference. Dirk was an above average defender at his peak but never special on that end. Peak Duncan was a near goat level defender before he lost his wheels(from his rookie season till about 04. Then he struggled for a few years till he became a full time center in about 08. That's a big deal given that Duncan was also fully capable of having an offense run through him.

[dankok8]

Obviously this is a close comparison and it's not a slam dunk either way but I would go with Barkley ahead of Dirk. Apart from scoring which is close (Barkley is even more efficient while Dirk scores more...), Chuck is a better rebounder, ball handler, passer etc. Barkley never put in much effort on defense but he was solid man to man especially in the playoffs and neither guy really gets much impact points on that end.

Barkley was simply a lot more versatile and it's easy to say "Dirk won a title with role players" but that team was built perfectly around him. High IQ PG in Kidd to get him the ball in his sweet spots. Flanked by two frontcourt players in Marion and Chadler who covered his weaknesses in defending the post and rebounding. Barkley had Mike Gminski and Mark West/Oliver Miller protecting the paint on his teams.

At the end of the day, a title is a team accomplishment and I judge the level of play. Barkley went to the Finals in 1993 and had a great series while defended by Pippen and Grant. He averaged 27.3 ppg, 13.0 rpg, 5.5 apg on 47.6 %FG/54.4 %TS and just 1.7 topg and had a great +12 Net Rating (ORtg = 123, DRtg = 111) which is a rarity for a player on the losing team. Honestly Barkley's 1993 Finals was a more impressive performance than either one of Dirk's. Nowitzki hit some big shots in Game 2 and Game 4 in 2011 but overall he was inefficient in the series and didn't pull nearly as much weight in other eras of the game.

[BarberSchool]

Barkley.

Peak Barkley was incredible.

Nowitzki did have God mode during the championship run, but not as great as chuck's peak. Dirk has a ring, and that's good, but Chuck was a better, more complete player.

[raiderfan19]

For the record Barkley was not a better ball handler than dirk

[OldSchoolBBall]

For the record Barkley was not a better ball handler than dirk

Yes he was.

[dhsilv]

For the record Barkley was not a better ball handler than dirk

seriously?

[raiderfan19]

Yes. Barkley was more flashley dirk was at least as good though. There's a reason dirk never turns the ball over. Iv seen dirk do behind the back through the legs and all that even though he normally doesn't. But flashier doesn't always equal better.

[Round Mound]

Obviously this is a close comparison and it's not a slam dunk either way but I would go with Barkley ahead of Dirk. Apart from scoring which is close (Barkley is even more efficient while Dirk scores more...), Chuck is a better rebounder, ball handler, passer etc. Barkley never put in much effort on defense but he was solid man to man especially in the playoffs and neither guy really gets much impact points on that end.

Barkley was simply a lot more versatile and it's easy to say "Dirk won a title with role players" but that team was built perfectly around him. High IQ PG in Kidd to get him the ball in his sweet spots. Flanked by two frontcourt players in Marion and Chadler who covered his weaknesses in defending the post and rebounding. Barkley had Mike Gminski and Mark West/Oliver Miller protecting the paint on his teams.

At the end of the day, a title is a team accomplishment and I judge the level of play. Barkley went to the Finals in 1993 and had a great series while defended by Pippen and Grant. He averaged 27.3 ppg, 13.0 rpg, 5.5 apg on 47.6 %FG/54.4 %TS and just 1.7 topg and had a great +12 Net Rating (ORtg = 123, DRtg = 111) which is a rarity for a player on the losing team. Honestly Barkley's 1993 Finals was a more impressive performance than either one of Dirk's. Nowitzki hit some big shots in Game 2 and Game 4 in 2011 but overall he was inefficient in the series and didn't pull nearly as much weight in other eras of the game.

Great stuff :applause: . And lets remember Barkley played with an injured elbow in game 2 onwards

[SaltyMeatballs]

Dirk - better scorer
Barkley - better all-around player. That's not even a debate.

[TommyGriffin]

For the record Barkley was not a better ball handler than dirk

:wtf:

[tpols]

Yes. Barkley was more flashley dirk was at least as good though. There's a reason dirk never turns the ball over. Iv seen dirk do behind the back through the legs and all that even though he normally doesn't. But flashier doesn't always equal better.

agreed.. barkley is much more physically talented/dominant, but he lacks mental strength, and this is a critical ingredient of winners.

[oarabbus]

For the record Barkley was not a better ball handler than dirk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mu3vkwP3GHQ

Dirk doesn't demonstrate handles like Barkley did.

[sportjames23]

Dirk. Not a liability on defense

:biggums:

[Sarcastic]

Basically the people who say Dirk didn't get to watch Barkley play, or Dallas stans.

[Gileraracer]

I'd take Dirk

[pastis]

young and agile Dirk Nowitzki:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7NSHXSBjZXo


its so funny. I guess 99% of people never watched Dirk (and Barkley), especially in Dirk his earlier years.


Basically the people who say Dirk didn't get to watch Barkley play, or Dallas stans.

basically, people who say Barkley didnt get to watch Dirk play, or Philly/Phoenix fans

[SexSymbol]

For the record Barkley was not a better ball handler than dirk
True, Dirk in his prime was an extremely good passer and ball handler for his size

[SexSymbol]

Basically the people who say Dirk didn't get to watch Barkley play, or Dallas stans.
I'm neither, and the choice is easy - Dirk

[DMAVS41]

Basically the people who say Dirk didn't get to watch Barkley play, or Dallas stans.

Yea...all the people voting at ESPN never saw Barkley play and also are huge Dallas stans...

How many more things need to happen for Barkley fans to adopt the only reasonable stance?

Barkley was a monster...he might have been better than Dirk if he played in different circumstances...we simply don't know.

Saying it wasn't/isn't close is stupid...Barkley had numerous flaws in his game and his personality and was far from the perfect player.

[sdot_thadon]

I'd probably go with chuck, just because I feel he was more dominant. Dirk has a heaven form jumper but he isn't the rebounder chuck was. We're talking 30/20 games. Neither was too hot on defense but chuck was tougher as well. If I need a dominating performance I pick chuck, if I need a shot to win the game give me dirk.

[Odinn]

Yea...all the people voting at ESPN never saw Barkley play and also are huge Dallas stans...

How many more things need to happen for Barkley fans to adopt the only reasonable stance?

Barkley was a monster...he might have been better than Dirk if he played in different circumstances...we simply don't know.

Saying it wasn't/isn't close is stupid...Barkley had numerous flaws in his game and his personality and was far from the perfect player.
We are not saying it's not close. The gap is clear. It's like comparing peak Shaq and peak Duncan. The margin of the gap can be a debate but it's clear.

[kennethgriffin]

barkley had the better peak offensive wise and was a more talented rebounder


thats about it

[pastis]

We are not saying it's not close. The gap is clear. It's like comparing peak Shaq and peak Duncan. The margin of the gap can be a debate but it's clear.

no. Dirk is 2nd/3rd goat PF (depends how you rate chuck malone) and def. ahead of the chubby checker chuckster and KG.

[greatest-ever]

Better player is a pick em, because i think they're about even in peak and prime. Careers is definitely Dirk because of much better longevity, and better success.

[DMAVS41]

We are not saying it's not close. The gap is clear. It's like comparing peak Shaq and peak Duncan. The margin of the gap can be a debate but it's clear.

Many have said it's not close.

And that just isn't true....the gap is not clear at all. If it was as clear as peak Shaq vs peak Duncan...you wouldn't have a list of unbiased basketball writers ranking Dirk over Barkley.

Nobody, well...almost nobody, is taking peak Duncan over peak Shaq.

Here, many are taking Dirk over Barkley....because it's a reasonable opinion and the gap, if there is even one, is anything but clear.

[Round Mound]

barkley had the better peak offensive wise and was a more talented rebounder

thats about it

Barkley Was a Better: Post Player, Scorer Per Shot Taken, Passer, Ballhandler, Coast To Coast Finisher, Stealer, Game 7 Performer, More Dominant, Recieved More Doulbe Teaming and Defensive Rotations etc. Chuck Was the Shaq Before Shaq. Dirk has Long Range and FT Shooting on Chuck, Thats It!

[DMAVS41]

Barkley Was a Better: Post Player, Scorer Per Shot Taken, Passer, Ballhandler, Coast To Coast Finisher, Stealer, Game 7 Performer, More Dominant, Recieved More Doulbe Teaming and Defensive Rotations etc. Chuck Was the Shaq Before Shaq. Dirk has Long Range and FT Shooting on Chuck, Thats It!


That's Not It!

You are forgetting being a better teammate, higher impact off the ball, smarter player, more durable, better and smarter defender.

If Charles cared more, tried hard on defense, didn't take stupid 3's, wasn't a distraction, was a better teammate....then the gap would be clear.

Barkley had more raw ability, he just didn't maximize it because he wasn't smart enough nor did he give it his all.

Shame...maybe he'd be thought of as Duncan level if he did...instead...he's in the next tier

Dirk at age 37 in year 18....just dropped 31/11 and was great again in crunch time

Barkley at age 37? Well...he didn't make it there because he didn't care enough. Barkley broke down at what? Like age 33 iirc...he was still good, but he basically missed every other game his last few years. Again, he didn't take care of himself and dedicate himself to the game.

[TheBigVeto]

Dirk. 2nd GOAT PF after Duncan.

[Spurs5Rings2014]

Then it's no contest with Duncan.

Because peak Dirk was capable of at least equaling Duncan in a series.

I think Duncan was better, of course, but if we are going with "no contest"...then in order for you to stay consistent...then you'd have to take Barkley over Duncan...which I don't think you'd do.

There was never a time in which Dirk and Duncan were play their best basketball...and it was just "no contest"...

:biggums: :wtf: :coleman: :mad: :( :facepalm


I love dirk but arguing someone vs dirk and vs Duncan has a really huge difference. Dirk was an above average defender at his peak but never special on that end. Peak Duncan was a near goat level defender before he lost his wheels(from his rookie season till about 04. Then he struggled for a few years till he became a full time center in about 08. That's a big deal given that Duncan was also fully capable of having an offense run through him.

:applause: :bowdown: :cheers: :rockon:

[kenny817]

Barkley had to go up against the Bulls.

So Didn't see prime Duncan, prime Kobe, and prime Bron/Wade?

[DMAVS41]

:biggums: :wtf: :coleman: :mad: :( :facepalm



:applause: :bowdown: :cheers: :rockon:


Not sure what you are confused about.

Duncan was never in a situation in which he went against peak Dirk...and it was "no contest"...

If you actually believe that you are one of the most biased people on here.

[Young X]

So Didn't see prime Duncan, prime Kobe, and prime Bron/Wade?Completely different levels.

We're talking about the GOAT here.

Nobody was beating those Bulls teams. Barkley had a great series and still somehow got outshined by Jordan everytime. This dude had a 30 point triple double and still lost in one of the games.

None of those Mavs teams are f*cking with the Bulls either. That ring that people use for Dirk against Barkley isn't happening against arguably the greatest team of all time.

[ArbitraryWater]

Completely different levels.

We're talking about the GOAT here.

Nobody was beating those Bulls teams. Barkley had a great series and still somehow got outshined by Jordan everytime. This dude had a 30 point triple double and still lost in one of the games.

None of those Mavs teams are f*cking with the Bulls either. That ring that people use for Dirk against Barkley isn't happening against arguably the greatest team of all time.

How ****ing dense or numb are you?

Stop this shit.. :facepalm

[catch24]

Completely different levels.

We're talking about the GOAT here.

Nobody was beating those Bulls teams. Barkley had a great series and still somehow got outshined by Jordan everytime. This dude had a 30 point triple double and still lost in one of the games.

None of those Mavs teams are f*cking with the Bulls either. That ring that people use for Dirk against Barkley isn't happening against arguably the greatest team of all time.

Phoenix also blew their chances in 1994 and 1995, choking against the Rockets who for all intents and purposes were NEVER considered GOAT-like...from team down to superstar.

[tpols]

Phoenix also blew their chances in 1994 and 1995, choking against the Rockets who for all intents and purposes were NEVER considered GOAT-like...from team down to superstar.

yup.. Jordan excuse doesnt work.


Not like Dirk didnt have ATG's in his way, Kobe, Duncan, Shaq, Lebron, Wade, Garnett, etc. By the time Dirk was able to actually win a ring, he did it as an underdog vs one of the more stacked teams of all time and at the end of his prime.. Barkley could never replicate that because of his awful work ethic/longevity and poor intangibles.

[DMAVS41]

yup.. Jordan excuse doesnt work.


Not like Dirk didnt have ATG's in his way, Kobe, Duncan, Shaq, Lebron, Wade, Garnett, etc. By the time Dirk was able to actually win a ring, he did it as an underdog vs one of the more stacked teams of all time and at the end of his prime.. Barkley could never replicate that because of his awful work ethic/longevity and poor intangibles.

It seems that people want to rank Barkley based on his perceived ability rather than what actually happened.

[Young X]

The teams the Mavs faced in 2011 were really good but they're not the Bulls. Barkley had to face the Bulls in 3 different series which just so happened to be in his 3 best seasons.

Barkley didn't have alot of opportunities to win a ring in his prime. He was on mediocre/bad teams in most of those years. It's really just the '93-'95 Suns.

[tpols]

The teams the Mavs faced in 2011 were really good but they're not the Bulls. Barkley had to face the Bulls in 3 different series which just so happened to be in his 3 best seasons.

Barkley didn't have alot of opportunities to win a ring in his prime. He was on mediocre/bad teams in most of those years. It's really just the '93-'95 Suns.

neither did Dirk tbh.. go look at his help relative to competition, he was worse off than Barkley.



And if Dirk had Barkley's work ethic, and lost his game by say like 2009 or 2010ish, he would be regarded as as big a choker as Barkley is. It was his longevity that allowed him to prove himself.

[k0kakw0rld]

Sir Charles :pimp:

[tpols]

After Dirk choked away the 2007 playoffs, he came back with resounding clutchness on his way to a ring a few years later end prime.

After Chuck choked away multiple series in the mid 90s, he went on to.... gain 50 lbs and fued with Scottie Pippen, where his lack of intangibles/leadership was put on blast by a guy who knew what mentality it took to win.

[Young X]

neither did Dirk tbh.. go look at his help relative to competition, he was worse off than Barkley.



And if Dirk had Barkley's work ethic, and lost his game by say like 2009 or 2010ish, he would be regarded as as big a choker as Barkley is. It was his longevity that allowed him to prove himself.Barkley was easily in a worse situation on the Sixers than Dirk on the Mavs. Nash alone was much better than anyone on the Sixers.

[ArbitraryWater]

The teams the Mavs faced in 2011 were really good but they're not the Bulls. Barkley had to face the Bulls in 3 different series which just so happened to be in his 3 best seasons.

Barkley didn't have alot of opportunities to win a ring in his prime. He was on mediocre/bad teams in most of those years. It's really just the '93-'95 Suns.

By that token, what years did Dirk have?

2003 and... 2007? 2007 mainly only because of the regular season work he did?

2003 was the only year he had a stacked team, and he was on his way to the title, until his WCF injury.

[Young X]

By that token, what years did Dirk have?

2003 and... 2007? 2007 mainly only because of the regular season work he did?

2003 was the only year he had a stacked team, and he was on his way to the title, until his WCF injury.Well if we're including '94 and '95 for Barkley then I would say 2005, 2006, 2007, 2011. 2003 too but Dirk got injured.

Outside of those years Dirk still played on solid teams even if they weren't elite. Barkley on the other hand played mostly on mediocre/bad teams for the rest of his prime years. Then in his MVP season and best chance at winning a title the Suns run into the Bulls. Dirk never had to face a team like that.

[raiderfan19]

You do realize Barkley played with Moses dr j mo cheeks Hersey Hawkins and cliff Robinson in philly right?

[Young X]

You do realize Barkley played with Moses dr j mo cheeks Hersey Hawkins and cliff Robinson in philly right?In his rookie and sophmore seasons when he wasn't even an all-star. :sleeping

I'm only talking about what happened in their primes.

[bizil]

Gotta roll with Sir Charles peak wise!! At his peak, he could LEGIT CLAIM being the best scorer, rebounder, and passer at the PF position. And his overall scoring skillset was like an SF YET he also had point forward type skills as well. To top it off, he was a freakish athlete who played MUCH BIGGER than his height. But GOAT wise, I will take Dirk. Dirk's longevity being great is DAMN NEAR unparalleled in NBA history.

[tpols]

Barkley was easily in a worse situation on the Sixers than Dirk on the Mavs. Nash alone was much better than anyone on the Sixers.

Does it matter when the Lakers, Spurs, and Kings were in his conference?


I think the Mavs outside their best player were the least talented of that group besides the Spurs. So I dont know why this would be held against Dirk, but not Barkley. Neither really had the help required to win.

[Young X]

Does it matter when the Lakers, Spurs, and Kings were in his conference?


I think the Mavs outside their best player were the least talented of that group besides the Spurs. So I dont know why this would be held against Dirk, but not Barkley. Neither really had the help required to win.I'm not holding anything against anybody, I'm just saying Barkley was in a worse position to win a ring than Dirk.

If you wanna talk about competition, Barkley had the Bulls, Celtics, Pistons, and Bucks in his conference. :confusedshrug:

[raiderfan19]

In his rookie and sophmore seasons when he wasn't even an all-star. :sleeping

I'm only talking about what happened in their primes.
And Moses was the only one who left after his sophomore season. He had at least 2 of dr j, cheeks, Hawkins and Robinson every year but one in Philly And Nash was gone after 2004. Dirks peak was 05-11

[tpols]

I'm not holding anything against anybody, I'm just saying Barkley was in a worse position to win a ring than Dirk.

If you wanna talk about competition, Barkley had the Bulls, Celtics, Pistons, and Bucks in his conference. :confusedshrug:

yea but the point is neither are probably winning in either of their early career situations, then Barkley had better help during the middle of his career than Dirk had, and arguably better at the end of his career as well.. that he did nothing but choke away, while Dirk got better as he aged.

[catch24]

Just too many excuses being made for Barkley. Dirk got it done bottom-line. He played similar competition and also had better longevity.

I think Barkley was better in his prime, but there shouldn't be an argument for careers IMO.

[Young X]

And Moses was the only one who left after his sophomore season. He had at least 2 of dr j, cheeks, Hawkins and Robinson every year but one in Philly And Nash was gone after 2004. Dirks peak was 05-11Dr. J was like 50 and about to retire. Cheeks was probably the best player Barkley played with in Philly from '87-'93. No all-star caliber teammates in that span.

yea but the point is neither are probably winning in either of their early career situations, then Barkley had better help during the middle of his career than Dirk had, and arguably better at the end of his career as well.. that he did nothing but choke away, while Dirk got better as he aged.In the middle of their careers, once again, Barkley had to face the Bulls in the finals. Dirk got to face the Heat with Lebron playing like a p*ssy. Big difference.

[raiderfan19]

You do realize the only all star dirk played with after he turned 25 was josh Howard right? No one else ever made an all star team while playing with Dallas after Nash left. We are really going to pretend like that's playing with absolutely loaded teams? People love to throw out names regardless of age for dirks teammates(Kidd, Marion etc) but if you do that for Barkley he's probably played with more talent than anyone in the history of basketball.

[tpols]

In the middle of their careers, once again, Barkley had to face the Bulls in the finals. Dirk got to face the Heat with Lebron playing like a p*ssy. Big difference.

dirk faced the Heat at the end of his career... Barkley wouldnt have even made it out of the conference at that age w/ the help Dirk had (which is underrated but relative to a stacked western conference plus Big 3 Heat really was a long shot)

In the middle he got to carry the stoner bros Josh Howard and Marquis Daniels to Finals appearances in a conference that had peak multi-star Spurs teams, while Barkley choked away series in epic fashion to Hakeem plus role players while having more talented rosters than Dirk.


You cant really spin their careers. Dirk just did way more with equal or less circumstances.

[ArbitraryWater]

Not sure even prime Barkley is doing this...

[QUOTE]Highest 4th Qtr PPG Average since 1995 (10+):

1997 Michael Jordan: 10.7 PPG
1998 Michael Jordan: 10.6 PPG
2000 Shaquille O'Neal: 11.4 PPG
2011 Dirk Nowitzki: 10.4 PPG

2011 Dirk Nowitzkis playoffs stats 4th quarter:

Dirk: 10 ppg on 51/53/94

The filters are:
5 point differential or less
Last 5 minutes of the game or OT

(Player Impact Estimate) - Shows what % of a game

[AussieSteve]

I remember when I was a kid, when Barkley was at is absolute best, he was genuinely in the same conversation as Magic and Jordan. You could, and people did, make a solid argument for him as the best player in the league. I don't think Dirk, or any other power forward for that matter, has ever been at that level.

In 1990, Barkley had more 1st place MVP votes than Magic Johnson in what was, by advanced stats, Magic's best season and the Lakers had the leagues best record. There were many who thought Barkley was robbed. In '93 Chuck beat MJ for MVP, and no one questioned it. Barkley went 27/13/6 during the finals that season and the Suns fell 1 bucket short of forcing a game seven against the Bulls. It took 41 ppg from Jordan to beat him.

For 5 or 6 seasons Barkley was the best that a power forward has ever been. I think he could have (maybe should have) been among the top 10 players of all time. But his lack of work ethic and attitude problems cut his prime short.

Which PF would I pick to start a franchise out of Dirk and Chuck? I'm actually not sure, maybe Dirk. But IMO, Barkley at his best was the best PF ever. He certainly had the most athleticism, skill and versatility of any PF that I've ever seen. Ranked in order of who was the best at their best, My top 5 all time power forwards would be 1.Chuck, 2. Duncan, 3. Garnett, 4. Dirk, 5. Malone.

[Sarcastic]

I remember when I was a kid, when Barkley was at is absolute best, he was genuinely in the same conversation as Magic and Jordan. You could, and people did, make a solid argument for him as the best player in the league. I don't think Dirk, or any other power forward for that matter, has ever been at that level.

In 1990, Barkley had more 1st place MVP votes than Magic Johnson in what was, by advanced stats, Magic's best season and the Lakers had the leagues best record. There were many who thought Barkley was robbed. In '93 Chuck beat MJ for MVP, and no one questioned it. Barkley went 27/13/6 during the finals that season and the Suns fell 1 bucket short of forcing a game seven against the Bulls. It took 41 ppg from Jordan to beat him.

For 5 or 6 seasons Barkley was the best that a power forward has ever been. I think he could have (maybe should have) been among the top 10 players of all time. But his lack of work ethic and attitude problems cut his prime short.

Which PF would I pick to start a franchise out of Dirk and Chuck? I'm actually not sure, maybe Dirk. But IMO, Barkley at his best was the best PF ever. He certainly had the most athleticism, skill and versatility of any PF that I've ever seen. Ranked in order of who was the best at their best, My top 5 all time power forwards would be 1.Chuck, 2. Duncan, 3. Garnett, 4. Dirk, 5. Malone.

Strong first post.

[Pointguard]

I remember when I was a kid, when Barkley was at is absolute best, he was genuinely in the same conversation as Magic and Jordan. You could, and people did, make a solid argument for him as the best player in the league. I don't think Dirk, or any other power forward for that matter, has ever been at that level.

In 1990, Barkley had more 1st place MVP votes than Magic Johnson in what was, by advanced stats, Magic's best season and the Lakers had the leagues best record. There were many who thought Barkley was robbed. In '93 Chuck beat MJ for MVP, and no one questioned it. Barkley went 27/13/6 during the finals that season and the Suns fell 1 bucket short of forcing a game seven against the Bulls. It took 41 ppg from Jordan to beat him.

For 5 or 6 seasons Barkley was the best that a power forward has ever been. I think he could have (maybe should have) been among the top 10 players of all time. But his lack of work ethic and attitude problems cut his prime short.

Which PF would I pick to start a franchise out of Dirk and Chuck? I'm actually not sure, maybe Dirk. But IMO, Barkley at his best was the best PF ever. He certainly had the most athleticism, skill and versatility of any PF that I've ever seen. Ranked in order of who was the best at their best, My top 5 all time power forwards would be 1.Chuck, 2. Duncan, 3. Garnett, 4. Dirk, 5. Malone.
Run Hide Duck!

Great first post but you did a couple of no, no's.

[fos]

I'll take Dirk, obviously. Matchup nightmare, career 25 and 10 playoff performer. 13x All-Star, League MVP, Finals MVP. Better defender. Consistently wins 50+ games every year with garbage players. The best player he played with was probably Jason Terry (Maybe Finley? Pre-breakout Nash?).

[ShawkFactory]

I remember when I was a kid, when Barkley was at is absolute best, he was genuinely in the same conversation as Magic and Jordan. You could, and people did, make a solid argument for him as the best player in the league. I don't think Dirk, or any other power forward for that matter, has ever been at that level.

In 1990, Barkley had more 1st place MVP votes than Magic Johnson in what was, by advanced stats, Magic's best season and the Lakers had the leagues best record. There were many who thought Barkley was robbed. In '93 Chuck beat MJ for MVP, and no one questioned it. Barkley went 27/13/6 during the finals that season and the Suns fell 1 bucket short of forcing a game seven against the Bulls. It took 41 ppg from Jordan to beat him.

For 5 or 6 seasons Barkley was the best that a power forward has ever been. I think he could have (maybe should have) been among the top 10 players of all time. But his lack of work ethic and attitude problems cut his prime short.

Which PF would I pick to start a franchise out of Dirk and Chuck? I'm actually not sure, maybe Dirk. But IMO, Barkley at his best was the best PF ever. He certainly had the most athleticism, skill and versatility of any PF that I've ever seen. Ranked in order of who was the best at their best, My top 5 all time power forwards would be 1.Chuck, 2. Duncan, 3. Garnett, 4. Dirk, 5. Malone.
Not bad.

Duncan certainly had a case for best player in the league any time from 03-05 though.

[Pointguard]

Not bad.

Duncan certainly had a case for best player in the league any time from 03-05 though.
As did KG in '04.

[Dragonyeuw]

I remember when I was a kid, when Barkley was at is absolute best, he was genuinely in the same conversation as Magic and Jordan. You could, and people did, make a solid argument for him as the best player in the league. I don't think Dirk, or any other power forward for that matter, has ever been at that level.

In 1990, Barkley had more 1st place MVP votes than Magic Johnson in what was, by advanced stats, Magic's best season and the Lakers had the leagues best record. There were many who thought Barkley was robbed. In '93 Chuck beat MJ for MVP, and no one questioned it. Barkley went 27/13/6 during the finals that season and the Suns fell 1 bucket short of forcing a game seven against the Bulls. It took 41 ppg from Jordan to beat him.

For 5 or 6 seasons Barkley was the best that a power forward has ever been. I think he could have (maybe should have) been among the top 10 players of all time. But his lack of work ethic and attitude problems cut his prime short.

Which PF would I pick to start a franchise out of Dirk and Chuck? I'm actually not sure, maybe Dirk. But IMO, Barkley at his best was the best PF ever. He certainly had the most athleticism, skill and versatility of any PF that I've ever seen. Ranked in order of who was the best at their best, My top 5 all time power forwards would be 1.Chuck, 2. Duncan, 3. Garnett, 4. Dirk, 5. Malone.
Good post. As I've said on many occasions, I recall some late 80's/early 90's Bulls-Sixers games where Chuck looked like the dominant player on the floor. He played with a certain ferocity that few could match. Still to this day one of the unique talents in the history of the game. He, Ewing, and Stockton/ Malone likely each have a ring if not for MJ.

[bizil]

Without a thought in terms of peak, Chuck! When comes to scoring, rebounding, and passing as a package, Chuck is the best PF of all time. He was also a freakish athlete to boot and he could dominate the SF position at a great level too. When it comes to forwards who could be EQUALLY GREAT at the SF or PF, Chuck, Bird, KG, and Bron are the MT. Rushmore.

GOAT wise, I would lean to Dirk. When u line up Dirk's resume, it moves him past Chuck. And in terms of longevity being an All Star caliber player, Dirk's run is arguably in the top 10 of all time. FOR ANY POSITION!! So u gotta give him props on that!

[BarberSchool]

Neither was a good defender.
Both excellent passing out of numerous double teams.
Barkley obviously a far better rebounder.
Barkley far more efficient scorer than almost anyone besides Jabbar or Shaq.
Nowizki was a far better shooter, and floor spacer, to benefit teammates.
Barkley was a better all around player, Nowitzki had a better/longer career.
I facot in peaks and how close a player got to their own ceiling, and the overall ceiling of their own era.
Barkley was a more dominant player, who could take over games more regularly.
Dirk still took over plenty of games, and an entire post-season, but still ...

Barkley.

[Smoke117]

Chuck.

[Young X]

Look at Barkley's two best games in the '93 Finals.

Game 2: 42/13/4 on 16-26 shooting

Game 4: 32/12/10 on 12-19 shooting

Two of the best finals performances ever.

Normally, those are good enough to win right?

But the Suns lost both games.

Why? Look at what a certain player on the other team did in both games.

The definition of getting one-upped.

Miss me with the "Dirk just got it done" bullshit.

[IllegalD]

Dirk, easily.

OP is just a Barkley Stan that overrates his lazy, overweight ass.

The real reason Barkley never won a ring is because he was lazy and didn't have the work ethic to maximize his god-given talents. Jordan and Pippen have said as much.

Couldn't get it done even though he jumped teams multiple times and even tried to form a superteam in Houston.


Duncan is the GOAT PF of course and easily shits all over Barkley's career, but battling out for the #2 GOAT PF spot are Dirk and KG. Both easily over ringless overrated ass Barkley and Malone, who failed to get rings even though both team-jumped to superteams.

I give Dirk the edge over KG because he actually carried his team offensively and won the least likely title in NBA history taking down giants. While KG won it with a superteam with two other HOFs carrying the offensive load.

Barkley and Malone just get hella' overrated because they're from the "golden era 90's".

[BarberSchool]

Dirk, easily.

OP is just a Barkley Stan that overrates his lazy, overweight ass.

The real reason Barkley never won a ring is because he was lazy and didn't have the work ethic to maximize his god-given talents. Jordan and Pippen have said as much.

Couldn't get it done even though he jumped teams multiple times and even tried to form a superteam in Houston.


Duncan is the GOAT PF of course and easily shits all over Barkley's career, but battling out for the #2 GOAT PF spot are Dirk and KG. Both easily over ringless overrated ass Barkley and Malone, who failed to get rings even though both team-jumped to superteams.

I give Dirk the edge over KG because he actually carried his team offensively and won the least likely title in NBA history taking down giants. While KG won it with a superteam with two other HOFs carrying the offensive load.

Barkley and Malone just get hella' overrated because they're from the "golden era 90's".Barkley and malone are both top 3 PF's of all time. Unless Dirk wins a 2nd title ofr they go back and replay the 2006 finals with real refs, Dirk has to settle for #5-#7 all time PF

[aj1987]

Barkley and malone are both top 3 PF's of all time. Unless Dirk wins a 2nd title ofr they go back and replay the 2006 finals with real refs, Dirk has to settle for #5-#7 all time PF
Quite easily one of the dumbest posts in this board. Both your assertions about Dirk and the '06 Finals are retarded AF.

[IllegalD]

Barkley and malone are both top 3 PF's of all time. Unless Dirk wins a 2nd title ofr they go back and replay the 2006 finals with real refs, Dirk has to settle for #5-#7 all time PF


Says who? :confusedshrug:

Dirk went to two finals and won a championship on teams where the best players were guys like Jason Terry, Tyson Chandler, Devin Harris, Josh Howard, and old ass Jason Kidd. This coming out of a murder's row West that was dominated by the Lakers/Spurs dynasties of that era.

Dirk will also destroy Barkley longevity-wise.

[GimmeThat]

the good news is that by the time Barkley realized that basketball had become an international sport, he'd been out of the league already

the bad news is that even though Dirk Nowitzki had always been hungry at the dinner table, he got his serving before the league was about to start do a little after the clock trading

[Bosnian Sajo]

Bark bark.

[Gougou]

Would take Dirk in a heartbeat.

[egokiller]

Barkley....he never really practiced and still dominated.

[k0kakw0rld]

Sir Charles :bowdown:

[brain drain]

Dirk.

Besides his scoring, the spacing he provided had a huge impact which doesn't show up on the stat sheet.

Just look at those two teams he took to the finals - those rosters had no business being there.

[tanibanana]

I like Barkley... but the answer is Dirk..
Besides the Championship.. Dirk has had the better overall career over Chuck.

[Big164]

The numbers say Barkley. He wins in ts%, rebounds, everything across the board.


But dat 2011 title run is so strong you have yo take dirk.

[SamuraiSWISH]

Neither was a good defender.
Both excellent passing out of numerous double teams.
Barkley obviously a far better rebounder.
Barkley far more efficient scorer than almost anyone besides Jabbar or Shaq.
Nowizki was a far better shooter, and floor spacer, to benefit teammates.
Barkley was a better all around player, Nowitzki had a better/longer career.
I facot in peaks and how close a player got to their own ceiling, and the overall ceiling of their own era.
Barkley was a more dominant player, who could take over games more regularly.
Dirk still took over plenty of games, and an entire post-season, but still ...

Barkley.
:applause:

[AussieSteve]

Not bad.

Duncan certainly had a case for best player in the league any time from 03-05 though.


As did KG in '04.


But not against the likes of Magic and MJ!! My point was that Chucks best was up there with two all time top 5 players.

[AussieSteve]

Dirk. Not a liability on defense

Barkley was not a liability on defense. This is a myth that has gained momentum over time with no basis in reality. I would argue that he was a much better defender than Dirk. Let me explain with the help of some stats...

Barkley led the Sixers in DWS/48 every season he was there (once equal first with Manute Bol). He also led the Sixers in DRtg every year except one (when he was 2nd to Bol) and in DBPM four times in five years. Chuck once had a DRtg 6 points better than the next best on his team (try and find any other non-center who ever achieved that!!). The point is that, he was clearly the best defender on his team for at least 4 or 5 years, and arguably 7 of the 8 years he was at Philly. When he and Scottie Pippen were both at Houston, Barkley trumped Pippen in every advanced defensive stat. Pippen is known to be a great defensive player, so this says something to me.

It’s easy to look at a players superior DRtg and say “yep he was a better defender” but this ignores the role of team defense on this number. For example, in Barkley’s last year at Phoenix he had a DRtg of 105 (which btw was the best at the Suns), the next year at Houston, when he had Olajuwon, his DRtg imporved by 5, to 100 (second at the Rockets behind Hakeem who was on 99). Was he all of a sudden a much better defender? No, the team you are on makes a difference.

Let's quickly look at Dirk's defensive prowess. His DRtg is slightly better over his career, but close enough to call a draw. His DWS/48 is not as good as Barkley, but its his Defensive BPM that really tells the story. In 18 seasons, he has had eight with a DBPM<0.0, two with DBPM=0.0 and eight with DBPM>0.0. Barkley NEVER had a single season with a negative DBPM. Dirk's best season... 1.7. Chuck's best... 3.9!! Is there really a debate?

Barkley suffered defensively because he completely carried his team offensively for many years, and the rest of his team was so bad on defense that he sometimes just gave up on it himself. So, yes he was often lazy on the defensive end, but when he played defense, he was a MUCH better defensive player than Dirk ever was.

[StephHamann]

Not even Barkley would say Barkley

[Dragonyeuw]

I like Barkley... but the answer is Dirk..
Besides the Championship.. Dirk has had the better overall career over Chuck.

Better career/better player doesn't always go hand in hand. I would take Hakeem over Duncan as a player without a moment's hesitation, but obviously Duncan had the better overall career.

[Bigsmoke]

Dirk

[AussieSteve]

Just a further comment on Barkley's defense. Here's a quote from back in the day by Bill Walton, Hall of Famer and long time senior writer for SLAM magazine:

"Barkley is like Magic [Johnson] and Larry [Bird] in that they don't really play a position. He plays everything; he plays basketball. There is nobody who does what Barkley does. He's a dominant rebounder, a dominant defensive player, a three-point shooter, a dribbler, a playmaker."

That's right - a dominant defensive player.

Also note Barkley won the Schick (IBM) Pivotal Player Award, for the best all round player in the NBA, three years in a row. Years in which the MVP awards went to Bird, Magic and Jordan.

[Big164]

There are only 2 rings in NBA history as big as averaging 50.4 points per game.

Russell's 11th Ring
Dirk's 11' Ring

Dirk defeated the best player with the best team, and that puts him ahead of Barkley.

[Round Mound]

Only thing Dirk is better than Barkley at is Long Distance Shooting and FT Shooting. Still Dirk shoots below 50% as a PF. He plays more like a SF though and is a missmatch do to his height. But Barkley WAS THE GOAT MISSMATCH for Forwards.

Barkley > Dirk

[Pointguard]

There are only 2 rings in NBA history as big as averaging 50.4 points per game.

Russell's 11th Ring
Dirk's 11' Ring

Dirk defeated the best player with the best team, and that puts him ahead of Barkley.

To be honest nobody gives Kidd credit for the best defensive stand ever.

Lebron who usually outscored Dirk in every season that he could legally drink was pathetic and looked like confused mummy in that series. While it could be argued that Lebron just flat out didn't show up, Marion gets some credit.

Durant who had spent the previous two years nearly getting 30ppg on the Mavs, totally is held in check this series. So Marion needs to get some credit.



But the Mav's leader in assist, steals and I think 3pointers Kidd, definitely deserves great credit for his defense.

Kobe used to outscore Dirk by great margins at that time in H2H's at that time. I think it was 3ppg careerwise but in 50 games but it had some real slaughters in there. Kidd's defense on Kobe was a superb as Kobe never became a factor.

Wade had murdered Dirk in Dirk's prime in the finals. This time Wade was in his prime and barely outplayed Dirk in the finals. Kidd defense on him kept Wade as insignificant.

Westbrook was a non-factor but part of a great defensive stand.

Brandon Roy was still capable of winning a series back then and had a great last stand.

Kidd was also the leader of the team. He never gets any credit. But Dirk shouldn't get credit for beating the best player in the game.

[DaHeezy]

Barkley ADED.
He was literally unstoppable. He rebounded like the ball was a burger and he hadn't had lunch for a week. Charles just had the unfortunate luck to play in a time where the Bulls were in their prime. Otherwise I think 1 or 2 championships were a possibility. I think if it weren't for the Bulls the Sixers could have made the finals a couple of times. The team with Barkley, Hawkins, Dawkins, Mahorn, and Gminski was a solid team.

[Silence]

Barkley had to go up against the Bulls.

No disrespect to Sir Charles, but I hate when people use this excuse. Charles Barkley and the Phoenix Suns had a 3-1 lead with home court advantage against the eventual champions, the Houston Rockets in the 1995 WCSF, and they blew it. The Orlando Magic made the finals that year, so facing the Bulls was not an applicable excuse.

[TommyGriffin]

Dirk is a much better defender. Barkley couldn't of done what Dirk did in 2011 either.

[Round Mound]

Dirk is a much better defender. Barkley couldn't of done what Dirk did in 2011 either.

:roll: :facepalm :rolleyes: :no:

[houston]

To be honest nobody gives Kidd credit for the best defensive stand ever.

Lebron who usually outscored Dirk in every season that he could legally drink was pathetic and looked like confused mummy in that series. While it could be argued that Lebron just flat out didn't show up, Marion gets some credit.

Durant who had spent the previous two years nearly getting 30ppg on the Mavs, totally is held in check this series. So Marion needs to get some credit.



But the Mav's leader in assist, steals and I think 3pointers Kidd, definitely deserves great credit for his defense.

Kobe used to outscore Dirk by great margins at that time in H2H's at that time. I think it was 3ppg careerwise but in 50 games but it had some real slaughters in there. Kidd's defense on Kobe was a superb as Kobe never became a factor.

Wade had murdered Dirk in Dirk's prime in the finals. This time Wade was in his prime and barely outplayed Dirk in the finals. Kidd defense on him kept Wade as insignificant.

Westbrook was a non-factor but part of a great defensive stand.

Brandon Roy was still capable of winning a series back then and had a great last stand.

Kidd was also the leader of the team. He never gets any credit. But Dirk shouldn't get credit for beating the best player in the game.



Dirk,Marion,Kidd = Mavs big 3 for that championship run.

[bizil]

When it came to Chuck's defense, A lot of PF's were taller than him. So they could shoot over him in the post. Guys like Coleman, Kemp, Mailman, etc. ALL had at least three inches on him. If he was playing SF's, many of them were great off the dribble. And even some of those guys had 2-3 inches on him.

I'm not saying Chuck was a standout on defense by ANY MEANS!!! But he was a short PF who carried a lot of weight with it. Basically, he was a tweener on defense because of that. In Dirk's case, he was TALLER than pretty much every other PF. He just wasn't as physical as many of them and DIDN'T have that tenacious defensive mentality like the premier defensive PF's.

Chuck HAD the physicality BUT he didn't have the height to bother their shots. Very few PF's can be undersized like say a Rodman and YET be able to defend virtually every position great! Rodman was the exception and not the rule. And even in Rodman's case, he was two to three inches taller than Barkley.

[Big164]

Jason Kidd was white

[warriorfan]

Barkley was not a liability on defense. This is a myth that has gained momentum over time with no basis in reality. I would argue that he was a much better defender than Dirk. Let me explain with the help of some stats...

Barkley led the Sixers in DWS/48 every season he was there (once equal first with Manute Bol). He also led the Sixers in DRtg every year except one (when he was 2nd to Bol) and in DBPM four times in five years. Chuck once had a DRtg 6 points better than the next best on his team (try and find any other non-center who ever achieved that!!). The point is that, he was clearly the best defender on his team for at least 4 or 5 years, and arguably 7 of the 8 years he was at Philly. When he and Scottie Pippen were both at Houston, Barkley trumped Pippen in every advanced defensive stat. Pippen is known to be a great defensive player, so this says something to me.

It’s easy to look at a players superior DRtg and say “yep he was a better defender” but this ignores the role of team defense on this number. For example, in Barkley’s last year at Phoenix he had a DRtg of 105 (which btw was the best at the Suns), the next year at Houston, when he had Olajuwon, his DRtg imporved by 5, to 100 (second at the Rockets behind Hakeem who was on 99). Was he all of a sudden a much better defender? No, the team you are on makes a difference.

Let's quickly look at Dirk's defensive prowess. His DRtg is slightly better over his career, but close enough to call a draw. His DWS/48 is not as good as Barkley, but its his Defensive BPM that really tells the story. In 18 seasons, he has had eight with a DBPM<0.0, two with DBPM=0.0 and eight with DBPM>0.0. Barkley NEVER had a single season with a negative DBPM. Dirk's best season... 1.7. Chuck's best... 3.9!! Is there really a debate?

Barkley suffered defensively because he completely carried his team offensively for many years, and the rest of his team was so bad on defense that he sometimes just gave up on it himself. So, yes he was often lazy on the defensive end, but when he played defense, he was a MUCH better defensive player than Dirk ever was.


Barkley WAS a liability on defense. Get this DBPM/Drtg shit out of here. Both of those are truly awful statistics. DBPM is heavily scaled on defensive rebounds (which Charles was very good at) but it does not account for many other factors on the defensive end. All you have to do is Eye Test it. Link any god damn game from Charles Barkley and you will see a ****ing turnstyle that is not even giving any effort. It's like James Harden playing at Power Forward. Your team can't have a guy playing James Harden on defense in your Front Court and expect to win a championship. That is why Barkley is ringless.

[Dray n Klay]

Or like Curry playing defense at the PG position

[ArbitraryWater]

Dirk,Marion,Kidd = Mavs big 3 for that championship run.

More like Dirk, and, well, if you wanna give it to a second one, Chandler.

Anyway its hilarious how bad detractors now want to downplay Dirk's achievements by saying how bad LeBron was, like the odds weren't incredibly against Dirk in the first place, lol

[Big164]

Barkley WAS a liability on defense. Get this DBPM/Drtg shit out of here. Both of those are truly awful statistics. DBPM is heavily scaled on defensive rebounds (which Charles was very good at) but it does not account for many other factors on the defensive end. All you have to do is Eye Test it. Link any god damn game from Charles Barkley and you will see a ****ing turnstyle that is not even giving any effort. It's like James Harden playing at Power Forward. Your team can't have a guy playing James Harden on defense in your Front Court and expect to win a championship. That is why Barkley is ringless.
This is just ETHER

Barkley at power forward crippled every team he played for. . Dude was a fat lazy bizzaro version of Jordan.

[Round Mound]

Dirk wasnt a great defender either and he was a bad rebounder and passer (especially for a 7 foot forward). Only things he was better than Barkley at was long distance shooting and ft shooting. He was just a shooter. Thats it. Barkley was the better all around player by miles. If Dirk played against Birds Celtics, Magics Lakers, The Pistons and Jordan-Pippen & Phil Jackson Bulls he would have been ringless too.

[Lebron23]

Charles Barkley.

[OldSchoolBBall]

What DDirk did in the 2011 playoffs was amazing, and I would take him in that postseason form over any version of Barkley. But when you start talking entire seasons, and especially 3-5 year pprimes, I have to go with Barkley fairly comfortably. Just a more dynamic player.

[La Frescobaldi]

What DDirk did in the 2011 playoffs was amazing, and I would take him in that postseason form over any version of Barkley. But when you start talking entire seasons, and especially 3-5 year pprimes, I have to go with Barkley fairly comfortably. Just a more dynamic player.

me too.
except I really couldn't say for certain that 2011 Dirk was better than Olympics Sir Charles.

[G-train]

The one that didn't spit on little girls in the crowd.

[bdreason]

I like Dirk, but Chuck was the better all around player.

[bdreason]

What DDirk did in the 2011 playoffs was amazing, and I would take him in that postseason form over any version of Barkley. But when you start talking entire seasons, and especially 3-5 year pprimes, I have to go with Barkley fairly comfortably. Just a more dynamic player.


That playoff run was awesome, no doubt... but Chuck and the '93 Suns would have had their way with that Heat team as well.

[La Frescobaldi]

That playoff run was awesome, no doubt... but Chuck and the '93 Suns would have had their way with that Heat team as well.

would like to see that Phoenix squad play against the Lakers of that later 2008-2011 time frame - would have been some great great basketball from both teams for sure

[houston]

More like Dirk, and, well, if you wanna give it to a second one, Chandler.

Anyway its hilarious how bad detractors now want to downplay Dirk's achievements by saying how bad LeBron was, like the odds weren't incredibly against Dirk in the first place, lol


Kidd was more important than Chandler. He was by far their best playmaker and solid defender. With Marion doing his thang his was match up Durant and Lebron in that run. Terry the 6th man with Chandler doing his thang.

But you correct about that Mavs team people thought the Mavs were going to underachieved again in the post season.