Printable View
Its probably been done before...but not in my time here so lets have a go.
I had this argument for a long time with certain friends and it cannot be resolved.
I am not going to bore you all with stats and whatever, I will just say that to me Charles was better and I cannot be convinced otherwise.
If it came down to one game, I'd take Chuck.
btw I am biased
Malone had better career. Barkley= better player especially at primes
It's a toss up skill wise, but most people on the forum would choose Barkley base on personality...
even washed up Houston Charles gave Mailman fits. Look at that scowl. [IMG]http://sport.ard.de/sp/basketball/news200502/15/img/400_dpa_malone_barkley.jpg[/IMG]
[QUOTE]It's a toss up skill wise, but most people on the forum would choose Barkley base on personality[/QUOTE]
I'll choose Malone, exactly because of personality (I want players who don't disrupt the team with their temperaments), and also longevity and defense. This while also taking account of Malone's choke jobs in big-time games and Barkley's offensive versatility.
[QUOTE]even washed up Houston Charles gave Mailman fits. Look at that scowl. [/QUOTE]
They are almost the same age. That's why I'd take Malone.
If Jordan and Pippen are still busy making fun of Barkley's D whenever they have a chance after all those years, you should be able to know that this really isn't that tough of a call.
Malone.
Which Barkley are we talking about? Young Charles or older Charles with the Suns? Either way I'll take Charles. More versatile and tougher pound for pound. Malone barked a lot but Charles would bite.
Malone.
If you actually watched both of them there would be no doubt who the better one is and that is Malone.
Bird defense? Magic defense? Yet they are considered top 5 players of all time and some will say they have a case for G.O.A.T status. Who cares what Pippen and MJ say about his defense. Karl was a good defender but you rarely ever hear anyone mention it when his game is praised or he is spoken of for what he has done in the game of basketball.
Barkley is better then Karl Malone.
mailman delivers!
Charles was more dominant on the ball, rebounding, and range. He grabbed boards and went end to end like no other in the NBA.
[QUOTE=JtotheIzzo]even washed up Houston Charles gave Mailman fits. Look at that scowl. [IMG]http://sport.ard.de/sp/basketball/news200502/15/img/400_dpa_malone_barkley.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE]
Malone played fantastic defense on prime Duncan at age 40 with one bad knee in the playoffs with LA.
[QUOTE=**** Biggly]Malone played fantastic defense on prime Duncan at age 40 with one bad knee in the playoffs with LA.[/QUOTE]
*waits for stats*
Charles could match Malone on the offensive end, and acutally had more range than Karl. At the end of a game, Charles had that assassin mentalitly. Malone didn't.
Barkely
I think they're both a little overrated. Malone is a better defender, but he's an on ball defender. He wasn't a good help defender at all for a PF. And offensively, he's consistent, but he lacked the creativity that most great players had.
Barkley is an anomaly. He's as difficult a cover as the leagues probably ever seen. Too quick and crafty for PFs, and too strong for SFs. And at times, he was quicker and had more ball skills than even SFs, and could overpower even the best PFs. But defensively, his size was always an issue. He had to go after everything, shots and rebounds, so much, that he was often out of position. It wasn't as much an issue of effort as it's made out to be. At his peak, I'd definitely take him over Malone. But I don't think either of them is as good as Duncan, or even McHale.
[QUOTE=Thorpesaurous]McHale.[/QUOTE]
I think Mchale is really overrated and not better than any of those 3, who where legit first options on all their teams. I also think Hakeem was clearly more effective in the offensive post than Mchale.
In egard to the recent comments
Duncan>Barkley>Malone>>McHale
Chuckie and Mail are close hence the thread, but if push came to shove I'd take Chuck. They both easily beat McHale who IMO doesnt have the skill set to go it alone like CB did.
Duncan however separates himself from the pack because of the bling and playoff MVPs and first team NBA for his first 8 years. Duncan will be a top ten of all time before it is over.
Duncan's game most resemble's McHales. And my preference for both of them stems from their both being better at defending the rim. Obviously there's a lot of projection with McHale not being a number one option, but none of the other guys would have been either with Bird on their team. And only Duncan has proven that he could win it on his own, so if Mchale were a number one option on a team, he wouldn't have to even win a title to prove he was in the neighborhood of Malone and Barkley. Barkley is clearly the hardest to defend in the group.
A few quotes from Charles himself
"Bird was a better player than me, but I always felt when I was in the game I could do things against him. But McHale? Best damn player I ever played against man-to-man. He gave me fits with those damn long arms and his agility. He could score on me and he could guard me."
"I tried hard to concentrate on defense once, but all I did was hurt myself. I was terrible. But I was as good as Larry. That man couldn't guard a chair. I loved Larry. I made the mistake of going drinking with him one time. He did nothing but drink Budweiser the whole night. Any man who drinks Bud the whole night can drink."
"Why couldn't I play today? All those sorry-asses out there making that kind of money. Who did I have to go against? Michael, Magic, Larry, Karl Malone. I mean, those *****es could play."
Charles was the better offensive player, for he had the greater range, superior ballhandling skills, hit the boards much harder, more difficult to guard (too quick for fours, too strong for threes). While he was disinclined to play defense, generally, he did bring it during the clutch.
Malone's defense is a bit overrated - although he was plenty strong to push any low-post player off the block, he couldn't move laterally. Nor could he jump high enough to contest shots, either. That means if his man was facing the hoop, he always got a clean look. Malone's trait for swiping the ball worked only on those who brought the ball up from the hip, a la David Robinson, but not on the technically superior low post players like Hakeem (always held the ball above his head).
Malone's superior conditioning led to the better career, but Barkley's the superior player.
[QUOTE=Silent Mav]A few quotes from Charles himself
"Bird was a better player than me, but I always felt when I was in the game I could do things against him. But McHale? Best damn player I ever played against man-to-man. He gave me fits with those damn long arms and his agility. He could score on me and he could guard me."
"I tried hard to concentrate on defense once, but all I did was hurt myself. I was terrible. But I was as good as Larry. That man couldn't guard a chair. I loved Larry. I made the mistake of going drinking with him one time. He did nothing but drink Budweiser the whole night. Any man who drinks Bud the whole night can drink."
"Why couldn't I play today? All those sorry-asses out there making that kind of money. Who did I have to go against? Michael, Magic, Larry, Karl Malone. I mean, those *****es could play."[/QUOTE]
Barkley also said Andrew Toney was the best player he's ever seen.
Izzo, I never said that Charles' quotes were the gospel truth. I remembered his quote about McHale and went to find it. Found these and thought they were amusing.
[QUOTE=Silent Mav]Izzo, I never said that Charles' quotes were the gospel truth. I remembered his quote about McHale and went to find it. Found these and thought they were amusing.[/QUOTE]
I did enjoy them, I just cant put Mchale ahead of CB or Malone
I can't put him ahead of Chuck. As far as Malone, depends on the day. I go back and forth on that one.
I know I'm in limited company with my opinion of McHale, and that's completely understandable. It's just something I've believed for a long time. And I don't put much weight into any of those kinds of quotes that players make. But it's always fun to read Barkley's ramblings, and Andrew Toney was a monster.
Chuck Barkley was better.
[QUOTE=Silent Mav]A few quotes from Charles himself
"Bird was a better player than me, but I always felt when I was in the game I could do things against him. But McHale? Best damn player I ever played against man-to-man. He gave me fits with those damn long arms and his agility. He could score on me and he could guard me."
[B][I][U]"I tried hard to concentrate on defense once, but all I did was hurt myself. [/U][/I][/B]I was terrible. But I was as good as Larry. That man couldn't guard a chair. I loved Larry. I made the mistake of going drinking with him one time. He did nothing but drink Budweiser the whole night. Any man who drinks Bud the whole night can drink."
"Why couldn't I play today? All those sorry-asses out there making that kind of money. Who did I have to go against? Michael, Magic, Larry, Karl Malone. I mean, those *****es could play."[/QUOTE]
:roll:
It sounds funny but its true......Barkley becuz of his quickness to spots and off the floor in Philly tried to be a good help defender and a better one on one defender.....but he was too aggressive...he'd go for too many shots like Thorpe said......the more you leave you feet especially wildy the greater chance of getter hurt......Karl Malone I don't think i've seen him block more than 7 shots in 15 years......early in his career he'd throw people but never like CHUCK.
Chuck is simply more talented.......Karl Malone had a great gym regimen...so what....If you really think that's why he had more longevity your a simpleton........his game and its lack of creativity.....his PG....who set him up....his 100% PF role...meaning he was always PF...he never played outside that role...whereas Bark's played all over the court......That is the source of Karls Longevity.
McHale was very talented but fragile ....he was very good at covering Barkley becuz he knew how to recover and where Barkley would bring up teh ball and he used his long arms eventhough he was outmuscled...and less athletic......He was way more of a post technition than Barkley but his veratility was not at the same level....Interms of Talent. I would say its Barkley..TD.Mchale..Malone...interms of guys who brought it over a period time greater than 6 Seasons......However the most talented PF's all time are guys like DC and LJ Kemp...who at their peak were unbeliveable talented in every aspect post to the three to running an offense from the point(DC did this better than Barkley not as a PG but the position on the floor called the point)
wasn't charles like the original...POWER forward (emphasis on power)...
[quote]However the most talented PF's all time are guys like DC and LJ Kemp...who at their peak were unbeliveable talented in every aspect post to the three to running an offense from the point(DC did this better than Barkley not as a PG but the position on the floor called the point)[/quote]
Nah, Barkley is the most talented power forward of all time.....to me it's not that close. Nobody that's every played that position could do absolutely everything as well as Charles did. Chuck had incredible athleticism for his size, hops and great speed, great handles, could shoot it, awesome post player, passed well, and is one of the best power forward rebounders ever. The other guys had more athletic LOOKING bodies but none had that much more than Charles anyway.
I took the stats of the Barkley vs Malone matchups since 1988. Here's what I got (first Charles, second Karl. The parenthesis indicates the game winner):
REG.SEASON
43/14/5--17/7/1 (B)
23/13/5--12/6/3 (B)
24/9/4--44/13/1 (B)
24/8/2--32/13/5 (M)
16/8/5--29/10/3 (B)
28/10/2--34/8/5 (M)
35/10/1--24/12/6 (M)
14/6/5--35/12/2 (M)
25/14/7--30/9/1 (M)
23/11/0--28/10/6 (M)
25/14/5--32/9/4 (B)
29/11/5--24/12/2 (B)
21/7/6--22/10/6 (B)
25/12/2--13/6/1 (B)
23/11/8--15/6/3 (B)
21/4/3--18/7/1 (M)
19/11/2--30/6/0 (M)
10/6/5--30/17/2 (B)
35/9/2--30/9/3 (B)
18/6/2--26/16/2 (M)
16/9/3--25/12/4 (M)
17/6/4--28/9/3 (M)
15/11/4--17/7/2 (B)
12/7/3--15/10/0 (M)
9/20/4--16/14/4 (B)
8/18/2--32/11/5 (B)
10/11/8--27/17/6 (M)
10/9/2--28/13/5 (M)
11/7/3--20/10/6 (M)
10/6/3--21/9/1 (M)
10/11/3--29/21/6 (M)
9/11/1--16/7/4 (M)
6/11/3--16/10/2 (M)
10/11/1--25/13/5 (M)
8/5/6--21/8/5 (M)
Barkley: 18.3 ppg, 9.9 rpg (14 wins)
Malone: 24.6 ppg, 10.5 rpg (21 wins)
PLAYOFFS
12/8/4--21/13/2 (M)
16/12/2--24/15/1 (M)
19/16/4--21/6/2 (B)
20/16/3--22/10/5 (B)
10/7/5--29/14/4 (M)
20/7/5--24/11/5 (M)
12/6/2--25/11/1 (B)
8/7/1--29/10/1 (M)
8/6/1--19/14/1 (B)
8/2/0--29/13/0 (M)
[QUOTE=dgbigballer9329]Nah, Barkley is the most talented power forward of all time.....to me it's not that close. Nobody that's every played that position could do absolutely everything as well as Charles did. Chuck had incredible athleticism for his size, hops and great speed, great handles, could shoot it, awesome post player, passed well, and is one of the best power forward rebounders ever. The other guys had more athletic LOOKING bodies but none had that much more than Charles anyway.[/QUOTE]
DC did everything was well as Barkley and was a better jump shooter off the dribble......LJ was every bit as adepth with the ball as Barkley he was basically a Barkley clone except he wasn't as strong actually Chris Webber is another guy that did it all....Kemp was the only guy I can think of as a better athlete...I was talking about skills not athletcism.
**** even AW handles better than Barkley what Barkley did have has been understated...EXPLOSIVENESS.he wasn't really relying on a mismatch people are saying he was too quick for Bigs and too strong for Swings. He was both faster and stronger than anyone that would attempt to cover him 90 percent of the time...he could still use speed on SF's.....and he could use power on power guys.....he could abuse guys like Horace Grant...and PIPPEN at their own strengths....Only KARL MALONE could PUNISH him in the post power wise.
interms of explosiveness he was really close to NIQUES and MJ's I haven't see anyone as all-around explosive as him interms of a burst of speed or strength on demand.
Pimre Barkley was a better player. Overall, however... I'll take Malone and his longevity.
[quote]
DC did everything was well as Barkley and was a better jump shooter off the dribble......LJ was every bit as adepth with the ball as Barkley he was basically a Barkley clone except he wasn't as strong actually Chris Webber is another guy that did it all....Kemp was the only guy I can think of as a better athlete...I was talking about skills not athletcism.
**** even AW handles better than Barkley what Barkley did have has been understated...EXPLOSIVENESS.he wasn't really relying on a mismatch people are saying he was too quick for Bigs and too strong for Swings. He was both faster and stronger than anyone that would attempt to cover him 90 percent of the time...he could still use speed on SF's.....and he could use power on power guys.....he could abuse guys like Horace Grant...and PIPPEN at their own strengths....Only KARL MALONE could PUNISH him in the post power wise.
interms of explosiveness he was really close to NIQUES and MJ's I haven't see anyone as all-around explosive as him interms of a burst of speed or strength on demand.[/quote]
Skills are not whole without the ability to always execute them. Coleman was very skilled no doubt, but because he didn't have Barkley's explosiveness he wasn't able to use his skills as well:
[URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W0COm1MfaWM"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W0COm1MfaWM[/URL]
This video details Barkley's career and as you can see....it's so impressive it's mindboggling. He just did everything unbelievably well, and like you said, he was a FREAK athletically. No man his size should move their body like he did. I do agree with you in that he didn't rely on mismatches or even carefully executed moves.......he just went at it hard and dominated. I don't know if we'll ever see someone be able to start and finish fast breaks, coast to coast, that recklessly and powerfully ever again. He was like a runaway freight train, a fat man who could outrun and outjump nearly anybody. I doubt even Nique had a highlight film as impressive as that.
Name Year G MP FG FGA TP TPA FT FTA ORB DRB TRB AST STL BLK TOV PF PTS
Charles Barkley 1073 39330 8435 15605 538 2020 6349 8643 4260 8286 12546 4215 1648 888 3376 3288 23757
Karl Malone 1476 54852 13528 26210 85 310 9787 13188 3562 11406 14968 5248 2085 1143 4524 4578 36928
Difference -403 -15522 -5093 -10605 453 1710 -3438 -4545 698 -3120 -2422 -1033 -437 -255 -1148 -1290 -13171
(sorry i couldnt line it up)
go to: [url]http://www.basketball-reference.com/labs/comp.cgi?I=barklch01%3ACharles+Barkley&y1=&C=malonka01%3AKarl+Malone&y2=&s=r&t=t&submit=Compare[/url]
[B]I think anyone who has watched basketball for many years knows that Barkley was a Better Player. I`d definetly go with Malone`s off court discipline and work ethic (Barkley hardly ever trained or hit the weight lifting room) but as a "Player" there is just so many things Barkley could do that Malone couldn`t and at that so much more efficient than Malone.
[U]Scoring[/U]
Barkley shot 58.13% from the 2-Point FG at 21.6 PPG on only 12.9 2-Point FGA PG for the Season and shot 55.13% from the 2-Point FG at 22.5 PPG in the Play-Offs at roughly 14.5 2-Point Point FGA PG as a whole Career.
That clearly shows how dominant Barkley was as a Forward Scoring prescence inisde the 3-Point line that could kill you in so many ways it its just laughable: Mid Range, Far Range, Post Up, Fadeaway Jumpers, 1 on 1 Off the Dribles, Coast to Coast etc..
His excessive 3-Point FGA is what blinds many fans for not understanding how dominante Barkley was in his prime which is undoublty not just superior but way more superior scorer than Malone and also taking Less FGA PG.
Rebounding:
Well Rebounding Title for Barkley says something, Rebounding % and Rebounding Avg clearly indicate Barkley too. 12.9 RPG in the Play-Offs as a Career is just insane.
Passing:
Regarding Assist Averages becaue the pathetic teams Charles had from 1986 to 1992 have all downgraded Chuck`s real Assist Capacity...one has one look at the clips and you can see who was the Better Passer, Game Creator, Dribbler etc.
Skills:
Other than FT shooting Malone has very poor skilles compared to Barley.
Defense:
Well Malone was taller had somewhat of a better reach but he was a poor leaper and did not have Center Notion to Move or Footwork to Time a Block as Charles did to go along a 39 inch vertical leap. Reason why Charles averaged more BPG for both Season and Play-Offs. Neither could Malone run back court and block Guards on a fast break, very few big man have been capable of that Hakeem, Charles. Both Malone where the Best Floor PF Defenders untill the arrival of Webber and Garnett but out of them all Barkley`s capacity to Floor Defend and Steal was clearly Superior to Malone`s do to Speed in a Closed Area and Agility. Reason why Charles Barkley has the Highest Steal Per Average in NBA History
Athleticism:
Well Barkley had a 39 inch vertical Leap, Was Quicker and Way More Agil than Malone. Speed wise they where both Fast but Malone could hardly go go fast with te Ball and heck Barkley could go Lead Breaks and Go Coast to Coast almost Guard-like like no other PF Ever! Strength wise they are both the most potent PFs Regarding: Strenght-Speed and Weight into one. Malone had a superior exterior Arm strength do to weight lifting but Barkley had the superior interior Arm strength to fight for loose balls rebounds and ocourse Barkley had the stronger Torso and Leggs.
Stamina:
Malone edged Barkley because of Off the Court Discipline but once again Barkley had to do more than just PF, especially from 1986 to 1992 in a pathetic aging team with new nobodies playing in the tougher more defensive slow paced ECF.
PER both Season and Play-Offs....Barkley is a Top 7-9 of All Time Malone is a Top 14-24
EFF well Barkley ranks amongst the most Skilled + Efficeint Players Ever in the Top 10 right up there with the Bird`s, Jabba`s , Wilt`s, Jordans, Big O`s, Magic`s
Finally Barkley`s Prime was Way Superipr to Malone`s...Witness to that and Malone`s intentions to Guard Barkley in 80s and early 90s was for 5 minutes because after that he would only get in foul trouble. The only to Guard Barkley was to Rotate Cs, PFs and SFs atleast 3 o 4 men for every game if not foul trouble was in sight.[/B]
[QUOTE=Sir Charles][B]I think anyone who has watched basketball for many years knows that Barkley was a Better Player. I`d definetly go with Malone`s off court discipline and work ethic (Barkley hardly ever trained or hit the weight lifting room) but as a "Player" there is just so many things Barkley could do that Malone couldn`t and at that so much more efficient than Malone.
[U]Scoring[/U]
Barkley shot 58.13% from the 2-Point FG at 21.6 PPG on only 12.9 2-Point FGA PG for the Season and shot 55.13% from the 2-Point FG at 22.5 PPG in the Play-Offs at roughly 14.5 2-Point Point FGA PG as a whole Career.
That clearly shows how dominant Barkley was as a Forward Scoring prescence inisde the 3-Point line that could kill you in so many ways it its just laughable: Mid Range, Far Range, Post Up, Fadeaway Jumpers, 1 on 1 Off the Dribles, Coast to Coast etc..
His excessive 3-Point FGA is what blinds many fans for not understanding how dominante Barkley was in his prime which is undoublty not just superior but way more superior scorer than Malone and also taking Less FGA PG.
Rebounding:
Well Rebounding Title for Barkley says something, Rebounding % and Rebounding Avg clearly indicate Barkley too. 12.9 RPG in the Play-Offs as a Career is just insane.
Passing:
Regarding Assist Averages becaue the pathetic teams Charles had from 1986 to 1992 have all downgraded Chuck`s real Assist Capacity...one has one look at the clips and you can see who was the Better Passer, Game Creator, Dribbler etc.
Skills:
Other than FT shooting Malone has very poor skilles compared to Barley.
Defense:
Well Malone was taller had somewhat of a better reach but he was a poor leaper and did not have Center Notion to Move or Footwork to Time a Block as Charles did to go along a 39 inch vertical leap. Reason why Charles averaged more BPG for both Season and Play-Offs. Neither could Malone run back court and block Guards on a fast break, very few big man have been capable of that Hakeem, Charles. Both Malone where the Best Floor PF Defenders untill the arrival of Webber and Garnett but out of them all Barkley`s capacity to Floor Defend and Steal was clearly Superior to Malone`s do to Speed in a Closed Area and Agility. Reason why Charles Barkley has the Highest Steal Per Average in NBA History
Athleticism:
Well Barkley had a 39 inch vertical Leap, Was Quicker and Way More Agil than Malone. Speed wise they where both Fast but Malone could hardly go go fast with te Ball and heck Barkley could go Lead Breaks and Go Coast to Coast almost Guard-like like no other PF Ever! Strength wise they are both the most potent PFs Regarding: Strenght-Speed and Weight into one. Malone had a superior exterior Arm strength do to weight lifting but Barkley had the superior interior Arm strength to fight for loose balls rebounds and ocourse Barkley had the stronger Torso and Leggs.
Stamina:
Malone edged Barkley because of Off the Court Discipline but once again Barkley had to do more than just PF, especially from 1986 to 1992 in a pathetic aging team with new nobodies playing in the tougher more defensive slow paced ECF.
PER both Season and Play-Offs....Barkley is a Top 7-9 of All Time Malone is a Top 14-24
EFF well Barkley ranks amongst the most Skilled + Efficeint Players Ever in the Top 10 right up there with the Bird`s, Jabba`s , Wilt`s, Jordans, Big O`s, Magic`s
Finally Barkley`s Prime was Way Superipr to Malone`s...Witness to that and Malone`s intentions to Guard Barkley in 80s and early 90s was for 5 minutes because after that he would only get in foul trouble. The only to Guard Barkley was to Rotate Cs, PFs and SFs atleast 3 o 4 men for every game if not foul trouble was in sight.[/B][/QUOTE]
posting in 2 year old threads? :rolleyes:
:confusedshrug: :pimp: