Who was better... Barkley or Kobe?

[AussieSteve]

This is not a troll thread

Career wise, sure Kobe wins hands down. Rings, longevity, career stats and accolades. I don't dispute this at all.

And of course Kobe had the crazy regular performances like 81 points, a 35ppg season etc. etc. Barkley can't match these achievements.

But who was better?




Well, let's look at each players' playoffs numbers over their best 10 years. Because the playoffs is what counts right. For Barkley this is 1986-1995. For Kobe its 2001-2010. Coincidentally, both these spans are age 22 - 31.

Stat - Kobe / Barkley
PPG - 28.8 / 25.9
REB - 5.7 / 13.6
AST - 5.4 / 4.5
STL - 1.5 / 1.7
BLK - 0.6 / 1.0
TOV - 3.2 / 3.1
eFG% - 48.6% / 53.9%
PER - 23.5 / 25.2
WS/48 - .178 / .201

Barkley has the decisive advantage here.

Also in terms of iconic playoff games. Does Kobe have any single playoff games that match Chucks 43 point triple double in Game 5 of the 93 WCF? Or his 44 / 24 game in game 7 of the same series to get the Suns into the finals? Or Barkley's 19 point final quarter to lift the Suns over DRob and the Spurs in game 5 and then his game / series winner in DRob's face the very next game?

Kobe scored 40 points once in 6 finals, and never more than 40. Barkley score >40 point once in 6 finals games. scoring 42.

Kobe scored at least 42 points once every 24.7 games. Barkley, every 24.6 games.

And of course Barkley did his scoring on such better efficiency and absolutely dominated the boards in the playoffs, meaning that he could be the most influential player on the court even if he wasn't scoring. Kobe...?


I don't know. Is Kobe only greater than Barkley because her had better teams and coaching?

[iamgine]

The flaw with Barkley is he's an awful defensive player and this doesn't show up on the stat sheet while Kobe's defense was all D level, although it becomes horrible when he got older.

[stalkerforlife]

This is not a troll thread

Career wise, sure Kobe wins hands down. Rings, longevity, career stats and accolades. I don't dispute this at all.

And of course Kobe had the crazy regular performances like 81 points, a 35ppg season etc. etc. Barkley can't match these achievements.

But who was better?




Well, let's look at each players' playoffs numbers over their best 10 years. Because the playoffs is what counts right. For Barkley this is 1986-1995. For Kobe its 2001-2010. Coincidentally, both these spans are age 22 - 31.

Stat - Kobe / Barkley
PPG - 28.8 / 25.9
REB - 5.7 / 13.6
AST - 5.4 / 4.5
STL - 1.5 / 1.7
BLK - 0.6 / 1.0
TOV - 3.2 / 3.1
eFG% - 48.6% / 53.9%
PER - 23.5 / 25.2
WS/48 - .178 / .201

Barkley has the decisive advantage here.

Also in terms of iconic playoff games. Does Kobe have any single playoff games that match Chucks 43 point triple double in Game 5 of the 93 WCF? Or his 44 / 24 game in game 7 of the same series to get the Suns into the finals? Or Barkley's 19 point final quarter to lift the Suns over DRob and the Spurs in game 5 and then his game / series winner in DRob's face the very next game?

Kobe scored 40 points once in 6 finals, and never more than 40. Barkley score >40 point once in 6 finals games. scoring 42.

Kobe scored at least 42 points once every 24.7 games. Barkley, every 24.6 games.

And of course Barkley did his scoring on such better efficiency and absolutely dominated the boards in the playoffs, meaning that he could be the most influential player on the court even if he wasn't scoring. Kobe...?


I don't know. Is Kobe only greater than Barkley because her had better teams and coaching?

When you have to start with that, it most definitely is a troll thread.

[90sgoat]

I have Kobe ranked 2nd all time.

[imdaman99]

The flaw with Barkley is he's an awful defensive player and this doesn't show up on the stat sheet while Kobe's defense was all D level, although it becomes horrible when he got older.
This. People may not remember but Paxson got wide open for 3 because of Barkley's poor defense.

[Phoenix]

You already know where this thread is gonna go, but I'll say this. Barkley had an incredible offensive peak. Now, if the conversation is going to be restricted to just raw scoring ppg or highest scoring nights, well this isn't going to get off the ground. But to consider that he was able to put up 28ppg at his peak, on like 16 shots and making less than a 3 a game, when most great scorers are having to put up 20 or more shots to get those kinds of numbers, and guys today are jacking up 8 3's a game to hit 30? It just shows you how incredible his 2 point shot-making ability was. His shot attempts were WELL below what a player of his offensive ability should have been getting up.

[Elosha]

This. People may not remember but Paxson got wide open for 3 because of Barkley's poor defense.

You're right. Barkley did slip up and made a bad gamble on Pippen which ultimately led to Paxon being wide open. See video below. On the other hand, it was absolutely great ball movement from the Bulls too.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b21gAhukchE

[StrongLurk]

Kobe.

[90sgoat]

For real though, if Barkley had the mindset and work ethic of Kobe, then Barkley would be an easy top 10 GOAT.

Barkley had the unique athletic ability of the GOATs, but he didn't have the work ethic of Kobe, who only had "top tier" athletic ability but had GOAT work ethic, intelligence and mindset.

[Proctor]

:roll: :roll: :roll:

Kobe

[Round Mound]

Aesthetics go to Kobe but Dominance goes to Sir Charles. Kobe was more elegant, polished and better work ethics. Charles was a mix of power and skill. I'd take prime and peak Sir Charles over Kobe though. From 89 to 93 Sir Charles was one of the most dominant and efficient players ever.

[Manny98]

Kobe because his playoff play was superior

[superduper]

I would say Barkley's prime was more dominant but he only played half the game (only offense).

Kobe >>

[Round Mound]

This is not a troll thread

Career wise, sure Kobe wins hands down. Rings, longevity, career stats and accolades. I don't dispute this at all.

And of course Kobe had the crazy regular performances like 81 points, a 35ppg season etc. etc. Barkley can't match these achievements.

But who was better?




Well, let's look at each players' playoffs numbers over their best 10 years. Because the playoffs is what counts right. For Barkley this is 1986-1995. For Kobe its 2001-2010. Coincidentally, both these spans are age 22 - 31.

Stat - Kobe / Barkley
PPG - 28.8 / 25.9
REB - 5.7 / 13.6
AST - 5.4 / 4.5
STL - 1.5 / 1.7
BLK - 0.6 / 1.0
TOV - 3.2 / 3.1
eFG% - 48.6% / 53.9%
PER - 23.5 / 25.2
WS/48 - .178 / .201

Barkley has the decisive advantage here.

Also in terms of iconic playoff games. Does Kobe have any single playoff games that match Chucks 43 point triple double in Game 5 of the 93 WCF? Or his 44 / 24 game in game 7 of the same series to get the Suns into the finals? Or Barkley's 19 point final quarter to lift the Suns over DRob and the Spurs in game 5 and then his game / series winner in DRob's face the very next game?

Kobe scored 40 points once in 6 finals, and never more than 40. Barkley score >40 point once in 6 finals games. scoring 42.

Kobe scored at least 42 points once every 24.7 games. Barkley, every 24.6 games.

And of course Barkley did his scoring on such better efficiency and absolutely dominated the boards in the playoffs, meaning that he could be the most influential player on the court even if he wasn't scoring. Kobe...?


I don't know. Is Kobe only greater than Barkley because her had better teams and coaching?


Don't forget the 56 point game vs the warriors in game 3 of 1994 1st round. That was pretty much a collage on how to score efficiently.

[sammichoffate]

Kobe is 3rd all time scoring, Barkley is 26th. Stop posting OP

[Round Mound]

Kobe is 3rd all time scoring, Barkley is 26th. Stop posting OP

So Malone > Jordan as a scorer since he is the 2nd accumulative total points?
So Allen Iverson > Kobe as scorer cause his PPG is higher?

Great scorers are the ones that are efficient per shot taken.

[ClipperRevival]

Not even a question, Kobe clearly.

People always talk about Chuck's advanced, offensive metrics. They also reference how little shots he took per game to score. Well, here's an idea, how about you up your shot attempts and do more to help your team?

Chuck never cracked 50 points in a regular season game. EVER. Doesn't that say it all?

[ClipperRevival]

As a matter of fact, in the 1,196 total games played (reg season & playoffs), good ole' Chuck cracked 50+ points once, in a playoff game.

You can't make this stuff up.

[SouBeachTalents]

Well, let's look at each players' playoffs numbers over their best 10 years. Because the playoffs is what counts right. For Barkley this is 1986-1995. For Kobe its 2001-2010. Coincidentally, both these spans are age 22 - 31.

Stat - Kobe / Barkley
PPG - 28.8 / 25.9
REB - 5.7 / 13.6
AST - 5.4 / 4.5
STL - 1.5 / 1.7
BLK - 0.6 / 1.0
TOV - 3.2 / 3.1
eFG% - 48.6% / 53.9%
PER - 23.5 / 25.2
WS/48 - .178 / .201

Barkley has the decisive advantage here.
Does he really though? The defensive stats are honestly irrelevant since nobody considers Barkley to be a better defender. And his literal fraction of an advantage in TO's is undone by his worse assist-TO ratio

[warriorfan]

Barkley was one of the worst defenders of all time. No exaggeration. PF is one of the most important positions defensively. It’s very hard to win with a power forward logging big minutes who is a defensive liability, no matter how good he is offensively.

[Round Mound]

Kobe has the longevity stats over Barkley but a Prime Peak & Healthy Barkley was way more dominant. Barkley was a lazy defender at times true but he wasn't as bad as some say especially in Phily. Barkley inside the 3-pointline was a much better scorer than Kobe. A 1990 Barkley was better than Kobe.

[AussieSteve]

Not even a question, Kobe clearly.

People always talk about Chuck's advanced, offensive metrics. They also reference how little shots he took per game to score. Well, here's an idea, how about you up your shot attempts and do more to help your team?

Chuck never cracked 50 points in a regular season game. EVER. Doesn't that say it all?

Chuck led offenses were #1 in the league 3 years in a row in Phoenix and #2 behind the lakers in back to back years at Philly. He led a team with rookie Hersey Hawkins and Mike Gminski as his 2nd and 3rd options to a better offense than every other team in the league except the Showtime lakers. I think he knew what he was doing.

And sure Barkley never cracked 50 in the RS, because he wasn't a ball hogging brick layer like Kobe. Im sure barkley couldn't care less about scoring 50. Kobe had whole months where he averaged 40+ right? Well where the hell are all his 40 & 50 point playoff games? Barkley scored >40 points more times in his 6 finals games than Kobe did in his 7 finals series!

You tell me who was the better big game scorer?

Kobe... 7 conference finals, 7 finals
Barkley... 2 conference finals, 1 final

Top 5 scores.

1. 45, Kobe, WCF
2. 44, Barkley, WCF (also 24 boards)
3. 43, Barkley, WCF (also a triple double)
4. 42, Barkley, Finals
5. 41, Kobe, WCF

Given just one fifth of the opportunities to score big on the biggest stage, Barkley still has three of the top four scores above.

[fourkicks44]

Where is the mutha f#ckin poll, Aussie Steve?

[MrFonzworth]

Kobe, all about the rangz mang

[NBAGOAT]

it's a shame impact stats really dont go back far enough for 90s guys. I like barkley a lot but it seems like his box score could overrate him some. He's no adrian dantley tbf who has similar effectiveness in the post who you can argue about being even a top 10 player even with incredible box score stats. Barkley's still one of the top guys after jordan. Still, his style especially in philly with the long back downs in the low post is super effective but can lead to some bad shots for teammates at the end of the shot clock.

Box score metrics love his defense especially bpm because of his rebounding but most people say he's a negative. Still an impact metric would be a nice baseline at least since it's really hard to gauge how bad to good someone is defensively.

Meanwhile for kobe, box score might underrate him some. Extremely high impact on offense from 06-08 with some of the most versatile scoring in nba history and some nice passing. Shot selection is his real flaw but hard to blame him too much for that in 06 and 07.

[ImKobe]

Not even a question, Kobe clearly.

People always talk about Chuck's advanced, offensive metrics. They also reference how little shots he took per game to score. Well, here's an idea, how about you up your shot attempts and do more to help your team?

Chuck never cracked 50 points in a regular season game. EVER. Doesn't that say it all?

Not only that, but his efficiency often dropped in the Playoffs (not counting early exit runs). He was almost always a 60%TS or higher scorer in his seasons but then you look at his efficiency dropping all the way to 55%TS in '93 during his MVP year in the POs, he only had one 60+%TS Playoff run (10+ games played minimum) and that was his 2nd year when he took 15 shots a game.

You can give me his best Playoff run and it doesn't stack up to Kobe's 30/6/6 on 57%TS average in his 3 straight Finals runs from 08-10.

Kobe was simply more complete on both ends and did everything to help his teams win and had that competitive mindset while Chuck was golfing with MJ and laughing it up with him on the court as his team was losing in the Finals.

You could argue that Chuck is worse than Kobe at every single facet of the game outside of rebounding. Give peak Kobe the '93 Suns and HCA against Jordan and there's no question that Kobe's team destroys the Bulls.

[NBAGOAT]

Not only that, but his efficiency often dropped in the Playoffs (not counting early exit runs). He was almost always a 60%TS or higher scorer in his seasons but then you look at his efficiency dropping all the way to 55%TS in '93 during his MVP year in the POs, he only had one 60+%TS Playoff run (10+ games played minimum) and that was his 2nd year when he took 15 shots a game.

You can give me his best Playoff run and it doesn't stack up to Kobe's 30/6/6 on 57%TS average in his 3 straight Finals runs from 08-10.

Kobe was simply more complete on both ends and did everything to help his teams win and had that competitive mindset while Chuck was golfing with MJ and laughing it up with him on the court as his team was losing in the Finals.

You could argue that Chuck is worse than Kobe at every single facet of the game outside of rebounding. Give peak Kobe the '93 Suns and HCA against Jordan and there's no question that Kobe's team destroys the Bulls.

:facepalm the 10 games minimum ofc skews it badly for barkley. Lot of his prime years are 1st round exits. He has 7 total, 2 at the beginning of his career and 3 past prime. Only one of those regular seasons above 60TS%. His rs and ps efficiency those runs.

RS PS
85: 59.9TS% 58.2TS%
86: 61.9TS% 63.1TS%
90: 66.1TS% 58.9TS%
93: 59.6TS% 55.2TS%
94: 56.3TS% 57.5TS%
95: 57.2TS% 58.0TS%
97: 58.1TS% 55.7TS%

so essentially only one of these years is a significant dropoff, solid over 7 playoff runs for an elite player. If you just do whole career, drops from 61.2 to 58.4 so more than kobe but this isnt a consistent playoff underperformer.

The point about barkley being worse at every part of the game besides rebounding is just exaggeration lol. Barkley is an all time great interior scorer and I would even pick his post scoring over kobe.

[tanibanana]

Better is not equal to Greater..

Barkley is slightly better player than Kobe.
Kobe is extremely greater player than Barkley.

The argument is like;
Paul Pierce is greater, but Grant Hill is better.
LaMarcus Aldridge is greater, but Blake Griffin is better.
Somewhat in this type of argument, this is due to their overall career.

[Kblaze8855]

Barkley was one of the worst defenders of all time. No exaggeration.

Its a massive massive exaggeration.

He was too capable physically and too great a defensive rebounder to even be close to the other lazy defenders who didnt have the ability to play it or the rebounding.


Charles Barkley wasnt an active defender. There are non active defenders who dont even have the potential to be good defender and did nothing on that end to remember. Charles made amazing defensive plays on a regular basis. He had game winning blocks, drew charges with the game on the line, ran down guards for chasedowns, guarded centers and wings if he had to and grabbed every rebound to prevent second chance points. Charles was out there throwing Hakeem dunks and picking the pockets of point guards.

A guy like Sam Cassell was capable of almost none of that. A lot of guys arent.

[Phoenix]

:facepalm the 10 games minimum ofc skews it badly for barkley. Lot of his prime years are 1st round exits. He has 7 total, 2 at the beginning of his career and 3 past prime. Only one of those regular seasons above 60TS%. His rs and ps efficiency those runs.

RS PS
85: 59.9TS% 58.2TS%
86: 61.9TS% 63.1TS%
90: 66.1TS% 58.9TS%
93: 59.6TS% 55.2TS%
94: 56.3TS% 57.5TS%
95: 57.2TS% 58.0TS%
97: 58.1TS% 55.7TS%

so essentially only one of these years is a significant dropoff, solid over 7 playoff runs for an elite player. If you just do whole career, drops from 61.2 to 58.4 so more than kobe but this isnt a consistent playoff underperformer.

The point about barkley being worse at every part of the game besides rebounding is just exaggeration lol. Barkley is an all time great interior scorer and I would even pick his post scoring over kobe.

That isn't even a point to be argued.

[Kblaze8855]

Not only that, but his efficiency often dropped in the Playoffs (not counting early exit runs). He was almost always a 60%TS or higher scorer in his seasons but then you look at his efficiency dropping all the way to 55%TS in '93 during his MVP year in the POs, he only had one 60+%TS Playoff run (10+ games played minimum) and that was his 2nd year when he took 15 shots a game.

You can give me his best Playoff run and it doesn't stack up to Kobe's 30/6/6 on 57%TS average in his 3 straight Finals runs from 08-10.

Kobe was simply more complete on both ends and did everything to help his teams win and had that competitive mindset while Chuck was golfing with MJ and laughing it up with him on the court as his team was losing in the Finals.

You could argue that Chuck is worse than Kobe at every single facet of the game outside of rebounding. Give peak Kobe the '93 Suns and HCA against Jordan and there's no question that Kobe's team destroys the Bulls.



Kevin Johnson
Kobe
Dumas
The remains of Tom Chambers(he started 5 games for the rest of his career after 91-92)
Mark West

Dan Majerle off the bench with Oliver Milller and the last bit of Danny Ainge


They are supposed to "destroy" the Bulls?

In the one matchup Kobe could face where hes decidedly not the best player at his position?

Horace Grant would pull down 18 rebounds a game vs that soft ass frontline. Hed probably get 13 offensive rebounds one night. The Suns only shot would be utterly destroying the Bulls in the backcourt and on the wings where they would be facing the best defensive wings in history.....in their primes....in a matchup they would take personal.

Naaaah.

Im not as worried about that team as the one we actually played.

That team wasnt ideal for Kobe to play the Bulls.

[Phoenix]

You could argue that Chuck is worse than Kobe at every single facet of the game outside of rebounding. Give peak Kobe the '93 Suns and HCA against Jordan and there's no question that Kobe's team destroys the Bulls.

The Suns had an edge in the frontcourt with Barkley. You're removing that one definitive edge, and replacing it with a situation where whatever Kobe does is going to be countered by 93 MJ thus removing any advantage for the Suns.

[ImKobe]

Bulls hounded Kevin Johnson and forced the ball out of his hands, adding Kobe takes more out of MJ/Pippen defensively and '93 Grant wasn't that great to begin with so I'm not worried about that. Kobe/Jordan would be a wash offensively but Kobe's teammates would outplay MJ's.

Dumas, Johnson and Thunder Dan are getting underrated here and Ainge was still an elite 3-point shooter as well. MJ dominated the Suns like no other team and it was still a relatively close series, Suns had no one to guard him but with Kobe his 41 ppg averages drops down to his usual norm of 32-35 just because he would have to spend more energy defensively to stop Kobe and Kobe was a great man defender in his prime and it would show under the old rules. Suns and Bulls scored an identical number of points IIRC in the series despite MJ outscoring Barkley by like 14 points a game.

[Phoenix]

Bulls hounded Kevin Johnson and forced the ball out of his hands, adding Kobe takes more out of MJ/Pippen defensively and '93 Grant wasn't that great to begin with so I'm not worried about that. Kobe/Jordan would be a wash offensively but Kobe's teammates would outplay MJ's.

Dumas, Johnson and Thunder Dan are getting underrated here and Ainge was still an elite 3-point shooter as well. MJ dominated the Suns like no other team and it was still a relatively close series, Suns had no one to guard him but with Kobe his 41 ppg averages drops down to his usual norm of 32-35 just because he would have to spend more energy defensively to stop Kobe and Kobe was a great man defender in his prime and it would show under the old rules. Suns and Bulls scored an identical number of points IIRC in the series despite MJ outscoring Barkley by like 14 points a game.


Kobe is going to be as much up to his eyeballs defending Jordan, as the other way around, except MJ has prime, athletic defensive Pippen to tag in so he doesn't overly exert himself on defense at the expense of his offense. Who's Kobe's defensive tag partner in this situation? Majerle? Dumas? We saw what happened there. Kobe was at his best defensively in the early 2000's when Shaq was guarding the yard and he could afford to gamble. Kobe's offensive peak in the mid 2000's came at the expense of consistent, night in, night out defense. Yeah, he's going to take on MJ personally but there's no way this doesn't have some impact on his offense. He'll drop 30 or whatever on much lower efficiency numbers if he has to go balls to walls defensively trying to 'hold' MJ to 'only' 32-35ppg. You lose a major rebounding edge when you take Barkley out. He alone was good for 13 boards, after that there's nobody in the frontcourt who's a serious rebounding threat. Horace and Scottie by themselves were good for 20 boards that series. Majerle and Ainge as the 3point shooters also get those looks taken away when you don't have Barkley's post gravity. Lots of things change when you swap Barkley and Kobe. It's not even about who is better and moreso what edges are gained or lost by swapping the two.

[Kblaze8855]

Bulls hounded Kevin Johnson and forced the ball out of his hands, adding Kobe takes more out of MJ/Pippen defensively and '93 Grant wasn't that great to begin with so I'm not worried about that. Kobe/Jordan would be a wash offensively but Kobe's teammates would outplay MJ's.

Dumas, Johnson and Thunder Dan are getting underrated here and Ainge was still an elite 3-point shooter as well. MJ dominated the Suns like no other team and it was still a relatively close series, Suns had no one to guard him but with Kobe his 41 ppg averages drops down to his usual norm of 32-35 just because he would have to spend more energy defensively to stop Kobe and Kobe was a great man defender in his prime and it would show under the old rules. Suns and Bulls scored an identical number of points IIRC in the series despite MJ outscoring Barkley by like 14 points a game.



This is the line of thinking that had people convinced the Bulls would be bad when Jordan retired.

Nobody gave the rest of the team credit then and still don

[SouBeachTalents]

Not only that, but his efficiency often dropped in the Playoffs (not counting early exit runs). He was almost always a 60%TS or higher scorer in his seasons but then you look at his efficiency dropping all the way to 55%TS in '93 during his MVP year in the POs, he only had one 60+%TS Playoff run (10+ games played minimum) and that was his 2nd year when he took 15 shots a game.

You can give me his best Playoff run and it doesn't stack up to Kobe's 30/6/6 on 57%TS average in his 3 straight Finals runs from 08-10.

Kobe was simply more complete on both ends and did everything to help his teams win and had that competitive mindset while Chuck was golfing with MJ and laughing it up with him on the court as his team was losing in the Finals.

You could argue that Chuck is worse than Kobe at every single facet of the game outside of rebounding. Give peak Kobe the '93 Suns and HCA against Jordan and there's no question that Kobe's team destroys the Bulls.
:roll:

[NBAGOAT]

That isn't even a point to be argued.

yea ik but kobe fans love the aesthetics of his post game. There's no substitute for scoring like 60% of the time however.

Also replacing a big with a guard is unrealistic in general. Just say kobe has a supporting cast roughly on the level kj, majerle, dumas, west, ainge. Turns out the 09-10 lakers isnt a terrible parallel with gasol, odom, ariza, bynum, fisher. Dont think most people have those lakers teams crushing the bulls however.

[Carbine]

Kobe played 37 finals games in his career.

Kobe who shot above 50 percent just five times in his Finals career. He actually has 13 games or OVER 1/3 of his entire finals career shooting 35 percent or below...... Shot 42 percent overal for his finals career. He's one of the worst top ten goat finals performers. Maybe THE worst.

And this is the guy who is going to replace Barkley doing 27/13/5.5 and generally creating a bunch of open shots for his teammates? And destroy the Bulls?


Those Suns teams with Hakeem instead of Barkley? Who knows.

But Kobe? The deciding factor between losing in 6 to "destroying" the Bulls.

People are dumb.

[SouBeachTalents]

Kobe played 37 finals games in his career.

Kobe who shot above 50 percent just five times in his Finals career. He actually has 13 games or OVER 1/3 of his entire finals career shooting 35 percent or below...... Shot 42 percent overal for his finals career. He's one of the worst top ten goat finals performers. Maybe THE worst.

And this is the guy who is going to replace Barkley doing 27/13/5.5 and generally creating a bunch of open shots for his teammates? And destroy the Bulls?


Those Suns teams with Hakeem instead of Barkley? Who knows.

But Kobe? The deciding factor between losing in 6 to "destroying" the Bulls.

People are dumb.
Kobe stans especially, at the very least completely delusional. All those Jordan comparisons have them thinking he was some great Finals performer when he's probably the worst of any top 10-15 player of all time.

Barkley's lone Finals performance was better than ANY of Kobe's, and he scored more points by his 2nd Finals game than Kobe did in 7 :lol

But nah, he's gonna go off against Jordan & Pippen

[RRR3]

ImKobe embarrassing himself ITT

[Carbine]

I was curious to see how many games Jordan has shooting poorly in his finals career. Has nothing to do with this thread but it's still interesting to me.

He shot below 40 percent only 4 times in his 35 Finals games. Shot above 50 percent in 18 of them.

Kobe isn't going to "cancel" Jordan out unless something drastically different than the norm happened.

[Round Mound]

Let's not forget that Charles played with an elbow injury from game 2 onwards. He probably would have shot better the rest of the series but the Bulls perimeter defense was to much to handle. Pippen and Jordan: The 2 Best Defenders in the League in their respective positions. While Grant was a Top 5 Defensive PF. Chuck had good offensive help but no defensive help pretty much.

[AussieSteve]

[QUOTE=warriorfan]Barkley was one of the worst defenders of all time. No exaggeration. PF is one of the most important positions defensively. It

[AussieSteve]

Not only that, but his efficiency often dropped in the Playoffs (not counting early exit runs). He was almost always a 60%TS or higher scorer in his seasons but then you look at his efficiency dropping all the way to 55%TS in '93 during his MVP year in the POs, he only had one 60+%TS Playoff run (10+ games played minimum) and that was his 2nd year when he took 15 shots a game.

You can give me his best Playoff run and it doesn't stack up to Kobe's 30/6/6 on 57%TS average in his 3 straight Finals runs from 08-10.

Kobe was simply more complete on both ends and did everything to help his teams win and had that competitive mindset while Chuck was golfing with MJ and laughing it up with him on the court as his team was losing in the Finals.

You could argue that Chuck is worse than Kobe at every single facet of the game outside of rebounding. Give peak Kobe the '93 Suns and HCA against Jordan and there's no question that Kobe's team destroys the Bulls.

Dude... outside of his rookie year, Philly Barkley averaged 25.0ppg on 65%t's in the RS and 25.0ppg on 63%t's in the PO.

Compare this to Kobe, who was the definition of inefficiency in the post season. Especially the finals. Why don't u post some of his post season efficiency stats?

[ILLsmak]

Kobe.

Let's not go any further than this.

-Smak

[Round Mound]

"...Chuck was golfing with MJ and laughing it up with him on the court as his team was losing in the Finals..."

That's not true it was Quinn Buckner who was golfing with MJ in between the finals.

That's one of the biggest myths ever and just a way to hate on Chuck,

[AussieSteve]

For what its worth I just want to reiterate Kobe's abysmal track record in the Finals for those who care for facts.

25.3ppg, 5.7rpg, 5.1apg, 3.3tov, 44.2%efg, 50.7%ts.

Barkley in the Finals...

27.3ppg, 13.0rpg, 5.5apg, 1.7tov, 48.4%efg, 54.4%ts.


All Barkley's numbers went up vs the RS (except efficiency, which was partially due to his injured shooting elbow and partly due to great D by the Bulls).

All Kobe's numbers went down vs the RS, especially efficiency.


Yes Kobe played in seven finals (being dragged to four of them by Shaq) and Barkley only played in one, but the point is still clear. Kobe on the biggest stage diminished, Barkley on the biggest stage did just fine.

Face it Kobe stans, without Shaq and Phil, Kobe would be HoF shooting guard jostling with the likes of DWade and CP3 for a top 20-25 spot all time.

[brutalBBQ]

Replace Barkley with Kobe on that Pheonix team, what's the result?

[ImKobe]

This is the line of thinking that had people convinced the Bulls would be bad when Jordan retired.

Nobody gave the rest of the team credit then and still don’t now. Talking about Danny Ainge like BJ Armstrong didn’t shoot 45% from 3 and lead the league....

It was a great team who would have totally eaten the suns inside and worried about nothing but guard play where they had the best defensive combo in history.

Again....that team wasn’t designed to work without Chuck inside. Not in the playoffs. Washed up Tom Chambers would have Horace looking like Moses Malone underneath by game 3.

Bulls added Kukoc and Kerr when Jordan first retired but look at how much worse they were offensively in 1994, they went from the 2nd best offense after the Suns to being mediocre on that end.

Armstrong was a good role player but that's all he was, he did lead the league in 3PT% but at only 1.7 attempts a game, compare that to Danny Ainge shooting 40.3% from three at 4.7 attempts per game and tell me which one is the better shooter, heck you can look at Thunder Dan shooting over 38% with 5.3 attempts a game.

Just look at the 1993 Suns roster, which had 6 guys other than Barkley putting up 11+ points a game with 3 of them scoring 15+ppg for the RS, obviously the Kevin Johnson injury played a part in skewing these numbers but they had the most offensive firepower in the league and the best 3-point shooting team as well.

And you don't put Chambers on Grant, you let West or Miller do it.


Dude... outside of his rookie year, Philly Barkley averaged 25.0ppg on 65%t's in the RS and 25.0ppg on 63%t's in the PO.

Compare this to Kobe, who was the definition of inefficiency in the post season. Especially the finals. Why don't u post some of his post season efficiency stats?

I already told you that Barkley's efficiency mostly dipped in the post-season when looking at deeper runs and not just the 1st round losses. He was 55%TS for the 1993 Finals run, he was 7/18 for 21 points in the Game 6 that they lost by 2 points at home. He blew a 3 - 1 lead to Hakeem in 1995, averaging 20 points on 40% shooting in the last 5 games that he lost 4 out of 5 in that included a pathetic 0/10 performance, he had 18 points on 16 shots in Game 7 where Kevin Johnson put up 46 in a 1-point loss. He lost in 7 games in 1994 as well, averaging 23 points on 53%TS in that series.

You get caught up in the cute efficiency numbers in regular seasons and 1st round Playoff losses but forget that those 65%TS numbers were nowhere to be seen in the biggest moments.

[Round Mound]

Bulls added Kukoc and Kerr when Jordan first retired but look at how much worse they were offensively in 1994, they went from the 2nd best offense after the Suns to being mediocre on that end.

Armstrong was a good role player but that's all he was, he did lead the league in 3PT% but at only 1.7 attempts a game, compare that to Danny Ainge shooting 40.3% from three at 4.7 attempts per game and tell me which one is the better shooter, heck you can look at Thunder Dan shooting over 38% with 5.3 attempts a game.

Just look at the 1993 Suns roster, which had 6 guys other than Barkley putting up 11+ points a game with 3 of them scoring 15+ppg for the RS, obviously the Kevin Johnson injury played a part in skewing these numbers but they had the most offensive firepower in the league and the best 3-point shooting team as well.

And you don't put Chambers on Grant, you let West or Miller do it.



I already told you that Barkley's efficiency mostly dipped in the post-season when looking at deeper runs and not just the 1st round losses. He was 55%TS for the 1993 Finals run, he was 7/18 for 21 points in the Game 6 that they lost by 2 points at home. He blew a 3 - 1 lead to Hakeem in 1995, averaging 20 points on 40% shooting in the last 5 games that he lost 4 out of 5 in that included a pathetic 0/10 performance, he had 18 points on 16 shots in Game 7 where Kevin Johnson put up 46 in a 1-point loss. He lost in 7 games in 1994 as well, averaging 23 points on 53%TS in that series.

You get caught up in the cute efficiency numbers in regular seasons and 1st round Playoff losses but forget that those 65%TS numbers were nowhere to be seen in the biggest moments.

[B]You are forgeting that Barkley was back injured in 94 half the season and in 95 in the series vs the Rockets. So KJ had to take the burden for those games. Barkley did not have problems playing injured even in his prime with Phily vs the Bulls in the early 90s he played with a cast on his leg and after game 2 of the 93 Finals. What about the 93 season? Where KJ only played 49 games and they had a better winning record without him while having 62 wins. KJ was a great scoring guard but he was not a 1st pass create for others then score PG like that of Magic or Stockton: he doesn

[Vino24]

Give Barkley Pau and Shaq. What happens?

[Charlie Sheen]

Yes Kobe played in seven finals (being dragged to four of them by Shaq)

Stop playing. You don't have any interest in a serious discussion with statements like these. This is trolling on the level of the dudes who denigrate pau and odom to boost Kobe.

[LostCause]

Give Barkley Pau and Shaq. What happens?

A logjam in the paint?

[ImKobe]

[QUOTE=Round Mound][B]You are forgeting that Barkley was back injured in 94 half the season and in 95 in the series vs the Rockets. So KJ had to take the burden for those games. Barkley did not have problems playing injured even in his prime with Phily vs the Bulls in the early 90s he played with a cast on his leg and after game 2 of the 93 Finals. What about the 93 season? Where KJ only played 49 games and they had a better winning record without him while having 62 wins. KJ was a great scoring guard but he was not a 1st pass create for others then score PG like that of Magic or Stockton: he doesn

[Round Mound]

Kobe was injured or played with serious injuries for most of his career so. Imagine if Kobe didn't have to deal with knee surgeries during his peak or play on one leg and with a broken index finger in his shooting hand during the 09 and 10 Playoffs, he was getting his knee drained during the 2010 title run which certainly didn't help with his overall efficiency but he found a way to get the job done, Barkley never did.

Barkley and Shaq don't mix as players or as personalities if we're talking about winning titles in the NBA. Shaq always needed an elite perimeter player to win rings. Kobe ran the triangle offense and also scored from the perimeter, you remove that outside/mid-range threat and have the two star players clog the paint with Derek Fisher running the show and it's a travesty for the Lakers. No team's winning 8 straight titles, especially not the Laker teams of the early 2000s.

Imagine Shaq & Barkley going up against Duncan and Robinson in the early 2000s with no Kobe on the perimeter :roll: good luck winning that series. I'm laughing just thinking about Barkley trying to adapt to Phil's triangle offense. :roll:

:roll: :facepalm :rolleyes: :no:

[fourkicks44]

Kobe was injured or played with serious injuries for most of his career so :confusedshrug: . Imagine if Kobe didn't have to deal with knee surgeries during his peak or play on one leg and with a broken index finger in his shooting hand during the 09 and 10 Playoffs, he was getting his knee drained during the 2010 title run which certainly didn't help with his overall efficiency but he found a way to get the job done, Barkley never did.

Barkley and Shaq don't mix as players or as personalities if we're talking about winning titles in the NBA. Shaq always needed an elite perimeter player to win rings. Kobe ran the triangle offense and also scored from the perimeter, you remove that outside/mid-range threat and have the two star players clog the paint with Derek Fisher running the show and it's a travesty for the Lakers. No team's winning 8 straight titles, especially not the Laker teams of the early 2000s.

Imagine Shaq & Barkley going up against Duncan and Robinson in the early 2000s with no Kobe on the perimeter :roll: good luck winning that series. I'm laughing just thinking about Barkley trying to adapt to Phil's triangle offense. :roll:

TBH Barkley was perhaps the best post passer I have ever seen ( Magic and Mark Jackson are the others that come to mind). He would have thrived in the triangle.

[AussieSteve]

Stop playing. You don't have any interest in a serious discussion with statements like these. This is trolling on the level of the dudes who denigrate pau and odom to boost Kobe.

This is fair. There's a lot of hyperbole in my comment, but Kobe having Shaq through his early-mid 20s is tantamount to Barkley having Jordan, Magic or Bird until 1990.

If that happened and Chuck won 3 or 4 rings between 86 an 90, which he like would have, does that make him better? Or more fortunate?

[Round Mound]

This is fair. There's a lot of hyperbole in my comment, but Kobe having Shaq through his early-mid 20s is tantamount to Barkley having Jordan, Magic or Bird until 1990.

If that happened and Chuck won 3 or 4 rings between 86 an 90, which he like would have, does that make him better or more fortunate?

Kobe had the better career and accolades but in terms of level of play, efficiency and dominance he can't holde a candle to Chuck. Most people here just analayze players according to rings. If that's so then Rusell is the GOAT.

[bizil]

Closer than what people may think. I would lean to Kobe for the great two way ability and being ARGUABLY the most skilled player ever. By skill i'm talking scoring skillset, handles, passing, and defense as a package. Of course MJ is right there. And a better player than Kobe. BUT in terms of overall skill, Kobe doesn't take a backseat to ANYBODY!

In terms of taking a game by the throat offensively, Chuck IS the best PF of all time! Great scorer, great passing PF, great handles, freak athletic ability, equally dominant at SF and PF. Or even in sort of a point forward type of capacity. U could make the case that the ONLY FORWARDS with a better peak-prime are Lebron and Bird! Just think the way Kobe could be a dominant defender is the major difference.

BUT I will say that Chuck was CLEARLY a much more revolutionary player than Kobe. Totally redefined the PF position. Before Chuck, there was never a PF like that. One who could be the prototype enforcer and was 260 pounds. BUT had the freak athletic ability and skillset of the top perimeter players. And he was only 6'5 playing the 4 spot! Played MUCH BIGGER than his height. Moved like a player MUCH LIGHTER! All the while was as physical and dominant in the trenches as any PF!

[Mr Feeny]

For what its worth I just want to reiterate Kobe's abysmal track record in the Finals for those who care for facts.

25.3ppg, 5.7rpg, 5.1apg, 3.3tov, 44.2%efg, 50.7%ts.

Barkley in the Finals...

27.3ppg, 13.0rpg, 5.5apg, 1.7tov, 48.4%efg, 54.4%ts.


All Barkley's numbers went up vs the RS (except efficiency, which was partially due to his injured shooting elbow and partly due to great D by the Bulls).

All Kobe's numbers went down vs the RS, especially efficiency.


Yes Kobe played in seven finals (being dragged to four of them by Shaq) and Barkley only played in one, but the point is still clear. Kobe on the biggest stage diminished, Barkley on the biggest stage did just fine.

Face it Kobe stans, without Shaq and Phil, Kobe would be HoF shooting guard jostling with the likes of DWade and CP3 for a top 20-25 spot all time.

Kobe was awful under pressure. He was abysmal in finals. But in Charlea' case, this is a very small sample size. It's one series.

You're bette off doing a playoffs vs regular season comparison.

[PickernRoller]

Damn so this is where all the rejects were holing up...

ImKobe toying with all of them. Sad sight.. :oldlol: :oldlol:

[Bigsmoke]

Kobe by far

[And1AllDay]

kobe bean alll the way


top 8 list

bran
kobe
russell
magic
kareem
shaq
duncan
bird

[Mr Feeny]

kobe bean alll the way


top 8 list

bran
kobe
russell
magic
kareem
shaq
duncan
bird

Sorry manny. you already said lebron was only 11th.

[CTbasketball92]

From what I can see, Barkley clearly had a more dominant peak. It was legit a top 12 or so level peak. Kobe in reality was more like a top 20 or so peak. His accolades and career make him like a top 10-15 player ever though, while Barkley is in the top 25-30

[Round Mound]

From what I can see, Barkley clearly had a more dominant peak. It was legit a top 12 or so level peak. Kobe in reality was more like a top 20 or so peak. His accolades and career make him like a top 10-15 player ever though, while Barkley is in the top 25-30

I have Chuck in the 15-20 range but prime and peak wise he was easily top 10. Kobe is also around the same level for me.

[GimmeThat]

well, Barkley is a truck and Kobe is a SUV. just what is the price between gold and diamond anyways

[ClipperRevival]

well, Barkley is a truck and Kobe is a SUV. just what is the price between gold and diamond anyways

What?

[Dr Hawk]

I have Kobe inside the Top 10 and Barkley outside.

[AussieSteve]

From what I can see, Barkley clearly had a more dominant peak. It was legit a top 12 or so level peak. Kobe in reality was more like a top 20 or so peak. His accolades and career make him like a top 10-15 player ever though, while Barkley is in the top 25-30

This.

Except I think that most have Chuck in the 18-22 range. I rate actual level of play higher than longevity and achievements influenced by circumstance (like having a GOAT team mate and GOAT coach). Hence i think having Barkley and Kobe in the same tier is perfectly valid.

[Round Mound]

These are they players i've got ranked ahead of Barkley:

1-MJ
2-Wilt
3-Kareem
4-Hakeem
5-Shaq
6-Duncan
7-Bird
8-Magic
9-Lebron
10-Big 0
11-Dr J
12-Moses
13-Elgin
14-Russell
15-Kobe
16-Barkley

[Charlie Sheen]

This is fair. There's a lot of hyperbole in my comment, but Kobe having Shaq through his early-mid 20s is tantamount to Barkley having Jordan, Magic or Bird until 1990.

If that happened and Chuck won 3 or 4 rings between 86 an 90, which he like would have, does that make him better? Or more fortunate?
No doubt. Playing with Shaq, in a league without Jordan, were both competitive advantages Kobe held over Barkley.

The last part is a really good question. I don't penalize Barkley for not winning when he had his best chance. Nobody got rings from Jordan in that league. Now, I'd be lying if I told you I don't care about winning at all. So, yeah, Barkley would probably look a little better in my eyes if he had multiple titles in an alternate reality. In this reality, I don't think he's a loser or it's some knock against him for not winning though. I know it's confusing but it makes sense to me :lol