-
Re: Barkley: I'm better than Malone
[QUOTE=AK47DR91]Didn't the Sixers win the championship just two years before Barkley was drafted? I believe they did. He was actually drafted into the perfect situation. Two Hall of Famers in Moses and Dr. J and a 4-time All-Star in Cheeks. Still better than any situation Malone ever had.[/QUOTE]
Do you mean a better situation for getting #s or better for winning? Barkley's situation was definitely better for winning, but nowhere near as good to amass stats.
-
Re: Barkley: I'm better than Malone
[QUOTE=Harison]
Speaking about Playoffs, [B]Charles had better teammates overall,[/B] and yet he had less Playoffs success than Malone. No advantage for Barkley here either.
[/QUOTE]
why do people keep spewing this BS, Barkley's prime in Philly he had NO ONE, having Malone in years 1 & 2 and an old broke Dr. J for 2/3 of a season after is not great teammates. Unless you think Mike Gminski and Ron Anderson are stars, because they were the #2 and #3 scorers on Barkley led teams.
Malone played with a top 5 PG of all time for his entire prime, Barkley had Hersey Hawkins. The f*ck out with this nonsense.
-
Re: Barkley: I'm better than Malone
[QUOTE=magnax1]I tend to go back and forth on Barkley and Malone. It's hard to ignore that Malone was a top 10 player for about 15 years, but it is true that Barkley was considerably better at his best, and in terms of offensive impact I'm not sure if there are 10 guys you can point to who were better then Barkley at his very best. Excluding his tendency to sometimes shoot questionable 3s and long 2s he played offensively almost exactly how you'd want a superstar to. Scored extremely efficiently, but he usually looked to improve his team mates chances as much as anything. I think more often then not those 3s he took were to try and get the defense to run him off the line and get more looks in the paint too, but I still dont like them.
[b]Well he had a big part in them losing game 5 by a couple points. It's one of the best examples of why he struggled in the clutch so often. As the defense got tighter at the end of the game, he just couldn't get good shots or position and basically threw a couple possessions away because of it. I think the only time he scored in the final 5 minutes was on a prayer 3 pointer, despite having most of the plays run for him. [/b]
Either way though, Houston was equally, or more talented and Hakeem's Rocket teams were built perfectly to exploit a couple of the mid 90's Jazz biggest holes. A very weak center position (Though Antoine Carr was great in some respects) and Utah's poor perimeter D at the time.[/QUOTE]
I agree with your initial point but disagree with the bolded. I don't think he did.
The Jazz built a 82-75 lead with about 5 min to go in the quarter. After they did that, they tried running the clock down which ultimately led to the demise. Malone was getting double teamed in the post and if you get double teamed, you make the right play and the right play was hitting the open shooter and Malone just did exactly that. The guy they were helping off of, David Benoit, couldn't nail the threes. Malone was forced to take a couple of shots with the clock running down. That was bad strategy on their behalf since it was too early to play the clock game.
You can see the Desert News blames the loss on the lack of 3 pt shooting down the stretch as well.
[QUOTE] If you thought the Rockets' defensive scheme down the stretch looked familiar, you were right.
It was the same thing we've seen all season - double-team on Karl Malone, man-to-man coverage on everyone else except David Benoit, who was virtually ignored. That's why Benoit had a chance to shoot three open threes in the fourth quarter. If he'd made one of those, there's a good chance it would have been the Rockets committing desperation fouls in the final couple of minutes, instead of the Jazz.No one came right out and criticized Benoit afterward, but there were some comments that seemed to come close.
"We had some opportunities in the fourth quarter; we just didn't make baskets," said Jazz coach Jerry Sloan.
"To their (the Rockets) credit, they hit most of their outside shots," said Jazz guard Jeff Hornacek.
[/quote]
[url]http://www.deseretnews.com/article/419738/CRUNCH-TIME-DEFENSE-PUT-BENOIT-ON-THE-SPOT.html?pg=all[/url]
Also, the Jazz were also very well built to exploit Houston's biggest holes BTW. That team was awful at guarding elite PGs yet Stockton didn't have as great of a series as he should've and they traded away Otis Thorpe and Carl Herrera was injured so they had no PF. Malone was guarded by Pete Chilcutt, Chucky Brown and Charles Jones for the most part and that's a major edge for anybody and it's not surprising he was able to have a dominant series getting to the foul line and forcing double teams. Horry didn't switch to the 4 until the PHX series.
[QUOTE=ShaqAttack3234]Charles is right, Malone never reached the level Barkley was at from '88-'93.
Charles was a better scorer, passer and rebounder, plus he was more athletic and more versatile. Charles was just the better and more dominant offensive player, that's why he was double teamed so often. In fact, out of players in Barkley's era or later, the only players I can think of who were doubled teamed as much as Charles was in his prime are Shaq and Hakeem. It's always been surprising to me how dominant he was in the post with his power game at only 6'5"-6'6". He's easily among the greatest power players of all time, and played both forward positions during his career. He played small forward in '90 and '91 alongside Mike Gminski and Rick Mahorn, and later at times when he played with AC Green in Phoenix.
Malone was definitely a better defensive player than Barkley, he developed until a great post defender around '94 or so. Remember Malone shutting down Robinson in the playoffs? He also developed into a very good passer around that same time, and he improved his jump shot while also becoming more polished in the post.
I actually really like Malone's game from '94-'00, but he was usually a disappointment in the playoffs, even when he became more polished. And Charles is right that be benefited greatly from Stockton, particularly late 80's/early 90's Malone. Though the same can be said about Stockton.
Malone got a lot of easy baskets running the floor, in screen/rolls with Stockton, and early on from lob passes over the top when defenders fronted him. Even the more skilled version of Malone was usually a disappointment in the playoffs, while Barkley showed quite a bit more dominance in the playoffs. Malone had more team success, but Charles was only on 1 contending team in his prime back in '93.
Late 80's/early 90's Karl Malone was still one of the league's best players, though. His post game was effective based on his quickness and strength. He was a great power player, and he did already have a jump shot, plus no 4 ran the floor better.
There's a common misconception about Barkley that he lacked longevity, but that's not true, we can't forget that he turned 30 in the '93 season, most players start to decline a bit shortly after that. He didn't remain at his prime level consistently due to injuries, and perhaps age, but he was still the second best power forward, and easily a top 10 player in '94 and '95. And he showed dominance even before his prime started in '88. Despite being raw in his second year in '86, he already probably established himself among the top players in the league.
His conditioning is also a misconception, his weight was not really an issue after his first year or 2 until he got to Houston. And even in Houston in '97, he averaged about 19/14/5 while sharing the ball with Olajuwon and Drexler and having his offensive game limited by the system. He was averaging 20/15 the first 2 months before injuries.
Malone's longevity was just superhuman, it was really only rivaled by Kareem and Robert Parish.
This isn't to say that Barkley didn't have his flaws as well. it's common knowledge that he was not exactly fond on playing defense, and he also had a habit of holding the ball too much which often led to turnovers because he'd leave his feet for cross court passes because he had trouble seeing over the double at times. He cut down on holding the ball by the time he got to Phoenix, and also improved his jumper. Though I don't think he had the same explosiveness despite getting in the best shape of his career and still being a very good athlete.[/QUOTE]
Great post. I agree on all counts. Barkley definitely had a better prime. I don't think he really cut down on holding the ball in PHX though. If anything, I'd say he increased it since he'd isolate a lot operating in the triple threat, holding the ball and often forcing longer, tougher jumpshots and he'd often look to exploit the illegal defense rule as well.
-
Re: Barkley: I'm better than Malone
chuck had the all-around game that the mailman never had.
they were both strong but both really played differently.
as heavy as chuck was, he had guard skills/ but he hung with all the bigs as well and often even destroyed them completely.
karl had more overall points, but he wasn't as skilled as chuck in creative scoring. with chuck, you can give him the ball at the top of the key and then clear the *** out. no pick and roll bullsht needed.
-
Re: Barkley: I'm better than Malone
[QUOTE]I agree with your initial point but disagree with the bolded. I don't think he did.
The Jazz built a 82-75 lead with about 5 min to go in the quarter. After they did that, they tried running the clock down which ultimately led to the demise. Malone was getting double teamed in the post and if you get double teamed, you make the right play and the right play was hitting the open shooter and Malone just did exactly that. The guy they were helping off of, David Benoit, couldn't nail the threes. Malone was forced to take a couple of shots with the clock running down. That was bad strategy on their behalf since it was too early to play the clock game.
[/QUOTE]
It's very true that Benoit had an awful end to that game, but Malone had just as big of a part. I think I actually broke the last couple minutes of the game down for you once, and I'd do it again, but it seems the channel on youtube that had the game in its entirety has been taken down. The general problem wasn't that they were playing the clock. They actually continued to run their normal plays most of the time, but Malone almost always got into position with little time left on the clock, or just didn't get in a position where he could get the ball in the first place. Sloan after a while actually started to run some plays for Antoine Carr after a bit IIRC, and had better success, but switched back for whatever reason. So a lot of the shots off double teams players were getting were with very little time left on the clock, and they were doubling Malone farther out then they should have been which made it easy to play defense out of those doubles. Either way, Benoit had a couple open shots he should have hit though.
[QUOTE]Also, the Jazz were also very well built to exploit Houston's biggest holes BTW. That team was awful at guarding elite PGs yet Stockton didn't have as great of a series as he should've and they traded away Otis Thorpe and Carl Herrera was injured so they had no PF. Malone was guarded by Pete Chilcutt, Chucky Brown and Charles Jones for the most part and that's a major edge for anybody and it's not surprising he was able to have a dominant series getting to the foul line and forcing double teams. Horry didn't switch to the 4 until the PHX series.[/QUOTE]
Malone really didn't dominate the series. He was good no doubt, but dominant is a huge exaggeration. Either way, it just wasn't as big of an edge as having to double Hakeem every time down the floor because their Front court was built of two 6'8 players, or Drexler having like a 5 inch height and 30 inch vertical leap advantage on Hornacek lol. Carr was actually a good defender in the post, especially in some matchups (he did a fantastic job on Shaq) but it was still an awful matchup problem since Hakeem just shot right over the top of him.
Stockton had a good series excluding the last game. He had two 25+ point games and averaged 18 ppg for the whole series on a good shooting %. However he was not going to dominate a team offensively by 95 in almost any matchup, because he had lost quite a bit of his ability to get inside, which is where he was capable of doing damage in terms of scoring. Houston just played way off him to make sure he couldn't do that, and let him shoot 3s and long 2s, which he tended only to do as a last resort.
-
Re: Barkley: I'm better than Malone
-
Re: Barkley: I'm better than Malone
[QUOTE=Shep]karl malone vs charles barkley head to head in the regular season:
malone: 23.7ppg, 10.1rpg 3.2apg, 1.3spg, 0.8bpg, 3.0topg, 52%fg
barkley: 18.4ppg, 10.1rpg, 3.8apg, 1.4spg, 0.5bpg, 3.2topg, 47%fg
malone: 23 wins
barkley: 16 wins
karl malone vs charles barkley head to head in the playoffs:
malone: 24.3ppg, 11.7rpg, 2.2apg, 1.4spg, 1.3bpg, 2.9topg, 44%fg
barkley: 13.3ppg, 8.7rpg, 2.7apg, 1.0spg, 0.3bpg, 2.3topg, 45%fg
malone: 6 wins
barkley: 4 wins[/QUOTE]
:oldlol: :roll: :no: :facepalm :rolleyes:
[B]This Guy is Funny as Hell
Barkley owned Malone for 10-11 Years. Clearly from 85 to 95 I have the stats
The Only Time Malone could Guard Barkley and do a Good Job was when Chuck was In Houston Overweight and Lost His Leaping Ability, Agility and Explosion at Age 33...Filled With Back and Knee Problems All Over
Barkley Owned Malone from 1985 to 1995.
Malone got the Better of Barkley from 96-2000.[/B]
-
Re: Barkley: I'm better than Malone
[B]Don`t Forget Malone Played with the Best Rim Protector and Shot Blocker Ever. 7`4 Mark Eaton for 9-10 Years...
Infact the 1988 Jazz > Any 90s Jazz[/B]
-
Re: Barkley: I'm better than Malone
[QUOTE]Just laughable[/QUOTE]
:oldlol:
[QUOTE]Barkley was never as low as 9th any season from '87 through '95[/QUOTE]
well that is flat out wrong, considering he was 9th in 1991. and then there was 1988 where he was 10th, and then 11th in 1989, and then 10th in 1990, and then finally 16th in 1992.
[QUOTE]No chance, Pippen was great in the second half and postseason, but he wasn't there yet. As much as I like Scottie, and despite it being probably his second best playoff run and a breakout year, Pippen probably wasn't top 10 yet, and certainly not better than Barkley. Though Pippen did enter the top 10 in '92 and I'd be tempted to rank him above Charles that season.[/QUOTE]
lol pippen was easily better than barkley, and top 2 overall.
17.8ppg, 7.3rpg, 6.2apg, 2.4spg, 1.1bpg on a 61 win team in the regular season
21.6ppg, 8.9rpg, 5.8apg, 2.5spg, 1.1bpg on a team that went 15-2 in the playoffs and obviously won the championship, including 32 points, 13 rebounds, 7 assists, 5 steals, and 1 block in the championship clinching game 5 on the road.
[QUOTE]Correct, he was number 2 as I mentioned.[/QUOTE]
he was third behind pippen
[QUOTE]Nah, but he has a case due to his defensive impact. But his 55 win Spurs were upset by the 44 win Warriors as they neutralized Robinson's impact, and David failed to really put his stamp on the series and dominate a tiny Warrirs team who were terrible defensively. Definitely a team he should have dominated.
This selection isn't outrageous, though, so I don't have a problem with it, just definitely disagree.[/QUOTE]
robinson did have a disappointing playoffs (even though he did average 25.8ppg, 13.5rpg, 2.0apg, 1.5spg, 3.75bpg, on 69%fg), and he was demoted in the overall rankings due to that, but we can't totally discount his fantastic regular season. robinson was the second most valuable player in the nba, only behind michael jordan in that regard, and averaged 25.6ppg, led the league with 13.0rpg, 2.5apg, 1.5spg, and 3.9bpg, on 55%fg while leading the spurs to a 55-27 mark.
[QUOTE]Stockton was never better than Barkley in any season until he was a Rocket. John was a terrific pure point guard and an excellent sidekick/complementary player, but at his best, he was borderline top 10. Just didn't have the true MVP-caliber ability to dominate a game that a guy like Barkley did. '91 may have been his best year, though, so if I'm feeling generous, I may give him the 9th ranking that you have Barkley, purely due to KJ being injured and unable to perform up to his standard in the playoffs. The same way KJ outplaying Stockton in the playoffs sealed his spot over Stockton in my '90 rankings.[/QUOTE]
on top of '91, stockton was also better than barkley in 1988, 1989, 1990, and 1992. fantastic floor general and leader, stockton was everything you could possibly ask out of your point guard. he could score, but he wouldn't shoot too much, he led the league in assists 9 straight seasons, was always in the top 5 is steals, and he shot the ball at a delicious clip from the field, 3 point, and free throw.
as for 1990 rankings stockton is still ahead of kj despite kj having the better playoff run due to stockton's far superior regular season. are you going to rank kj ahead of magic johnson in 1990 aswell considering johnson beat magic's lakers 4-1 :rolleyes:
[QUOTE]Nah, Hakeem was typically close to Barkley from '88-'92, and passed him after, but Hakeem missed 26 games, and when he returned, he was in a reduced offensive role averaging just 18 ppg upon returning to the lineup with Kenny Smith leading them in scoring and Houston succeeding with an up tempo style, outside shooting and screen/rolls as opposed to Dream carrying them in the post. Houston went 20-7 with Dream in the reduced offensive role, and they had a winning record for once with Dream out of the lineup going 16-10. This was a down year for Hakeem. He definitely wasn't better than Barkley this season.[/QUOTE]
14 out of those 26 games were at home
of those 16 wins 3 were against the timberwolves (2 at home) who finished 29-53
2 wins were against the worst team in the nba (nuggets)
1 win was at home to the clippers (31-51)
2 wins against the cavs (33-49)
in 26 games they only ended up beating 3 teams with winning records. olajuwon then came back in and joined a team that was 9 over .500 and they finished 22 over .500.
[QUOTE]No as I covered before. '92 was the only year from Barkley's prime when Malone was better, and that's because Barkley was a notch below prime level that year.[/QUOTE]
destroyed
[QUOTE]Not a chance. Drexler had a very nice all around game, but was a guy who benefited greatly from transition opportunities and wasn't the type of dominant half court offensive player that Barkley he was. He wasn't the same type of player who would alter a team's entire defense, cause constant doubles and impose his will on a game. Besides, Clyde had the most talented team in the league, and they were upset by the Lakers. There's a visible difference between Drexler and Barkley when watching them. Out of their entire careers, Drexler was only better than Barkley in '98.[/QUOTE]
slightley better in the regular season, and easily better in the playoffs. drexler led his team to the best record in the nba, and the conference finals. drexler was just superb in the playoffs, with averages of 21.7ppg, 8.1rpg, 8.1apg, 2.1spg, and 1.0bpg
[QUOTE]Nah, Barkley had the better regular season too.[/QUOTE]
:oldlol:
[QUOTE]Barkley's team won 44 games because they were weak, they went just 5-10 without him[/QUOTE]
well obviously barkley should have been playing, otherwise they might not have went 5-10
[QUOTE]Charles scored almost as much on better efficiency while not being the beneficiary of Stockton's countless assists. Malone relying on easy baskets, particularly at that stage of his career is why his efficiency plummeted as usual to 42.4% in the semifinals when Portland knocked them out and 45.5% for the entire playoffs.
Barkley was also the vastly superior passer at that time.
At least Malone was arguably a top 5 player himself, but regardless of how close their rankings were, the gap in ability was still clear in '91.[/QUOTE]
baskets are baskets, easy baskets or difficult baskets. i know i'd rather have my power forward being in the right spots for layups than shooting fade away 3s with 15 seconds left on the shot clock.
malone was aslo the vastly superior defender at that time.
[QUOTE]Nah, and if you did have a case for that statement, it'd be due to missed games, but 15 isn't enough. And 3rd team is way too low. Malone was the only forward besides Barkley who was even top 10 that year.[/QUOTE]
it will be due to games missed and 15 games is a bit chunk of the season. pippen was another forward in the top 10 that year, infact he was ranked 2nd. and as for forwards in the all-nba teams 1st team should've been malone and pippen. second team dominique wilkins and chris mullin. third team would be larry nance and charles barkley
[QUOTE]Hawkins was a nice player who could certainly score, but in no way was he a top 3 shooting guard. In addition to Jordan and Drexler, Hawkins also finds himself behind Dumars, Richmond, Reggie Lewis and possibly Reggie Miller.[/QUOTE]
firstly reggie lewis was a small forward. dumars was nice but not on the level of hawkins in this one particular season, the others are nowhere in the vicinity.
[QUOTE]Gilliam was a talented post scorer, but he was a bad fit in Philly. This was because his game did not fit with Barkley's. Anderson was a nice bench scorer, and Mahorn was indeed solid. But that's not much depth, and precisely why they struggled to a 5-10 record without him[/QUOTE]
or was it because barkley had the type of game that was hard to adjust to as a teammate? i know for example that kj was on pace to be one of the great all-time guards before barkley decided to force a trade to the 56 win suns team..and his career fizzled not long after.
[QUOTE]For me it's simple, you ask me who I'm taking between '89-'93 Barkley and '94-'98 Malone, and I'm taking Barkley without thinking twice.[/QUOTE]
its quite simple for me aswell i am taking malone 100 times out of 10.
[QUOTE]That is interesting that Malone was voted MVP in a season that was nowhere near his best, though part of that speaks to the lack of quality seasons in the lockout year. And while I don't care about awards given out in a 50 game season, I'd have chosen Duncan.[/QUOTE]
i also have duncan as league mvp, but it is just an interesting thought.
-
Re: Barkley: I'm better than Malone
[QUOTE]This Guy is Funny as Hell
Barkley owned Malone for 10-11 Years. Clearly from 85 to 95 I have the stats
The Only Time Malone could Guard Barkley and do a Good Job was when Chuck was In Houston Overweight and Lost His Leaping Ability, Agility and Explosion at Age 33...Filled With Back and Knee Problems All Over
Barkley Owned Malone from 1985 to 1995.
Malone got the Better of Barkley from 96-2000.[/QUOTE]
:roll: this clown again :roll: i have already destroyed this filth
barkley - fat and bald, no defense, cried and got traded to dominant teams and still lost
malone - incredible work ethic, never missed games, defensive genius
-
Re: Barkley: I'm better than Malone
[QUOTE=Round Mound][B]Don`t Forget Malone Played with the Best Rim Protector and Shot Blocker Ever. 7`4 Mark Eaton for 9-10 Years...
Infact the 1988 Jazz > Any 90s Jazz[/B][/QUOTE]
don't forget barkley played with hall of famers hakeem olajuwon, scottie pippen, clyde drexler, moses malone, julius erving, andrew toney, and maurice cheeks :applause:
-
Re: Barkley: I'm better than Malone
Going by their peaks and individual skills, Barkley was better than Malone. Better at creating, more efficient scorer, more versatile, better rebounder, better passer, and better in the clutch. A common misconception is that Barkley was a terrible defender. Barkley wasn't a terrible defender at all. He was however, a very lazy defender. He took many plays off on D. He also wasn't big on conditioning, unlike Malone, who was a gym rat.
Now as far as teammates. Some like to say that Barkley had way more help. Not true. Barkley's only real help was his rookie year, where he had Moses(25/13), Dr. J(20/5), Toney(18/5), and Cheeks(13/6), and reached the ECF.
In '86, Moses didn't play at all in the playoffs. Chuck led the way, averaging 25/16/6 with Dr. J playing respectably, but clearly declining...and Mo Cheeks putting up 21/7/5 in the playoffs and they were 1 win away from the ECF.
In '87, Moses was gone, Dr. J was on his last legs, and Toney was a bench player. Cheeks was the only other real dependable player.
Then from '88 on, no Moses or Dr. J and Cheeks left in '89. His sources of help were Cliff Robinson, Mike Gminski, Hersey Hawkins, Ron Anderson, and Johnny Dawkins.
There were 3 years where the 76ers greatly overachieved solely because of Barkley's play. The 1st one was in '86 where Moses didn't play at all in the playoffs and they came within 1 win of the ECF with Barkley averaging 25/16/6 in the playoffs. The 2nd one was in '90 where Barkley led the 76ers to 53 wins and was robbed of MVP. The 3rd one was in '91 where the 76ers swept Milwaukee in the first round with Barkley averaging 24/11/7/3 on 52% shooting in the three games, including a triple-double in game 2.
Barkley at his best was the best player in the world not named Michael Jordan. As great as Malone was, he was never at that level of greatness. Malone never singlehandedly took over games and led otherwise mediocre teammates to victory like Barkley did. Malone often folded under pressure, something Barkley didn't do. Barkley may have had games where he didn't play as well as he should have, but he never flat out choked. He actually elevated his play in the playoffs. My only issue with Charles was his laziness. He took many plays off and that is something Malone didn't do. The better player was clearly Charles Barkley. The better career however, was clearly Karl Malone.
-
Re: Barkley: I'm better than Malone
I would take the Mailman over Barkley everytime. Barkely tool way took many plays off defensively for my liking.
-
Re: Barkley: I'm better than Malone
[QUOTE=Shep]:roll: this clown again :roll: i have already destroyed this filth
barkley - fat and bald, no defense, cried and got traded to dominant teams and still lost
malone - incredible work ethic, never missed games, [B]defensive genius[/B][/QUOTE]
:roll: :roll:
-
Re: Barkley: I'm better than Malone
[QUOTE]Barkley wasn't a terrible defender at all. He was however, a very lazy defender. He took many plays off on D. [/QUOTE]
They are one in the same. Having the ability but not putting it to use is irrelevant. The net effect on the court is: bad defender.
[QUOTE]Barkley at his best was the best player in the world not named Michael Jordan. As great as Malone was, he was never at that level of greatness[/QUOTE]
You could definitely make that argument for malone in 97 and 98.
-
Re: Barkley: I'm better than Malone
[QUOTE=eliteballer]They are one in the same. Having the ability but not putting it to use is irrelevant.[/QUOTE]
They're not the same at all. Being a terrible defender would mean that even when putting in the effort, he would still suck. That would be like Steve Nash, who could put all the effort in the world into defense and he would still stuck. When Charles put in the effort, he was a very good defender. Philadelphia announcers made notice of this around '90-'91. They specifically mentioned Chuck was lazy on D, but was very good when he put in the effort. Chuck actually bitched to them when they made the comments.
[QUOTE]You could definitely make that argument for malone in 97 and 98.[/QUOTE]
Just because he was the best player after Jordan doesn't mean he was on Barkley's peak level.
-
Re: Barkley: I'm better than Malone
[QUOTE=D.J.]They're not the same at all. Being a terrible defender would mean that even when putting in the effort, he would still suck. That would be like Steve Nash, who could put all the effort in the world into defense and he would still stuck. When Charles put in the effort, he was a very good defender. Philadelphia announcers made notice of this around '90-'91. They specifically mentioned Chuck was lazy on D, but was very good when he put in the effort. Chuck actually bitched to them when they made the comments.[/QUOTE]
The net effect on the court is: terrible defense. Ability is irrelevant. All that matters is the actual result on the court.
-
Re: Barkley: I'm better than Malone
Both alltime greats, both ran into a wall that was mj, i'd go with malone
-
Re: Barkley: I'm better than Malone
[QUOTE=eliteballer]The net effect on the court is: terrible defense. Ability is irrelevant. All that matters is the actual result on the court.[/QUOTE]
Ability is not irrelevant. Not all players have the ability, Chuck did. And Chuck did provide evidence(even if only in brief stretches) that he was a good defender when he didn't take plays off. I watched games of Chuck. I watched him lock players down and provide weak side defense. I'm not blind. And I also very clearly remember him playing in the late 80s and early 90s.
-
Re: Barkley: I'm better than Malone
I still remember Scottie Pippen absolutely BLASTING Barkely when they were with the Rockets, for his questionable dedication to working hard. Said he was just all about his numbers...
-
Re: Barkley: I'm better than Malone
[QUOTE=PJR]I still remember Scottie Pippen absolutely BLASTING Barkely when they were with the Rockets, for his questionable dedication to working hard. Said he was just all about his numbers...[/QUOTE]
That has to do with his laziness, which anyone who watched Barkley play will admit to. Chuck was very lazy, but there's not many guys you would pick over him if you needed a big performance in a game 7.
-
Re: Barkley: I'm better than Malone
[QUOTE=Shep]
well that is flat out wrong, considering he was 9th in 1991. and then there was 1988 where he was 10th, and then 11th in 1989, and then 10th in 1990, and then finally 16th in 1992.[/QUOTE]
He was 4th or 5th in '88 behind Bird, MJ, Magic and possibly Hakeem.
He was 3rd in '89 behind Jordan and Magic.
He was 4th in '90 beind Jordan, Magic and Ewing.
He fell out of the top 5 in '92, but 16 is way too low.
[QUOTE]he was third behind pippen[/QUOTE]
Pippen was nowhere near a top 2 player in '91 or Magic Johnson's level.
[QUOTE]robinson did have a disappointing playoffs (even though he did average 25.8ppg, 13.5rpg, 2.0apg, 1.5spg, 3.75bpg, on 69%fg), and he was demoted in the overall rankings due to that, but we can't totally discount his fantastic regular season. robinson was the second most valuable player in the nba, only behind michael jordan in that regard, and averaged 25.6ppg, led the league with 13.0rpg, 2.5apg, 1.5spg, and 3.9bpg, on 55%fg while leading the spurs to a 55-27 mark.[/QUOTE]
Robinson wasn't terrible in the Warriors series, I'm not saying that, and his numbers look great out of context, but they're largely a product of playing a team like Don Nelson's Warriors. But the numbers weren't really a consideration, just from watching that series, I can say that he didn't dominate it like he should have(we seem to be in agreement on that part).
As far as regular season, come to think of it, Robinson would be high on my list behind Jordan. It's between Magic and David Robinson for 2nd, though Magic had a deeper, more talented team that didn't deal with the same injuries that Robinson's Spurs did.
I don't have a big issue with you taking Robinson over Barkley as I said before. Robinson's defense is a major advantage, but Barkley's offensive dominance gives him the edge for me.
[QUOTE]on top of '91, stockton was also better than barkley in 1988, 1989, 1990, and 1992. fantastic floor general and leader, stockton was everything you could possibly ask out of your point guard. he could score, but he wouldn't shoot too much, he led the league in assists 9 straight seasons, was always in the top 5 is steals, and he shot the ball at a delicious clip from the field, 3 point, and free throw.[/QUOTE]
You're definitely overrating Stockton. He did do a brilliant job of running Utah's offense, and he was a nice defensive player as well. Solid shooter, pretty good off the dribble, and he was a capable scorer. But he wasn't a great scorer due to both mentality and creativity. He lacked the superstar ability to create off the dribble and was often overly passive when Utah needed him to step up and score more. He had very few big scoring games throughout his career, I appreciate his consistency, but even Jerry Sloan called him out at times for passing up shots he should have taken, and being too passive.
[QUOTE]as for 1990 rankings stockton is still ahead of kj despite kj having the better playoff run due to stockton's far superior regular season. are you going to rank kj ahead of magic johnson in 1990 aswell considering johnson beat magic's lakers 4-1 :rolleyes:[/QUOTE]
KJ is ahead of Stockton due to his ability to take over a game and dominant, while also being a pretty damn good passer. The Suns up tempo style probably helped his numbers a bit, but he was a nightmare with his crossover and automatic pull up mid-range shot. His scoring was a major advantage over Stockton's. He also led the league's 3rd best offense, who did have a lot of talent, but struggled mightily when KJ was out. KJ and Stockton were relatively close, which is why the playoffs seal the deal for me. KJ was considered by most to be the second best PG in the league that year. In a GM survey from before the playoffs, KJ finished second in best PG rankings behind Magic, and actually got quite a few votes for best PG, and he probably would have received more after his Suns upset the Lakers.
Magic Johnson had his 2nd or 3rd best year and was just in a different class than either KJ or Stockton. His dominant post game, and proficient 3 point shooting that season allowed him to control a game so much offensively in addition to the fact that he was arguably the best passer of all time, and the Lakers were now able to run their offense through magic in the post. Magic had become an excellent passer out of double teams and when he was guarded 1 on 1, he scored most of the time.
And the Suns upsetting the Lakers is different because I wouldn't say KJ even outplayed Magic. The Suns won because Dan Majerle primarily guarded Magic 1 on 1, and Magic made him pay with 30 ppg for the series and back to back 43 point games. But this strategy also proved very effective because it prevented the other Laker players from having success because they were used to feeding off Magic's double teams. And it also hurt the Lakers that Tom Chambers did a surprisingly good job defensively on Worthy.
KJ did have a good series vs a fine defender in Byron Scott, though, and I will assign some blame to Magic. Magic got burned defensively by Jeff Hornacek's shooting because Magic was never a good defender, and his habit of roaming often allowed shooters to go off.
[QUOTE]14 out of those 26 games were at home
of those 16 wins 3 were against the timberwolves (2 at home) who finished 29-53
2 wins were against the worst team in the nba (nuggets)
1 win was at home to the clippers (31-51)
2 wins against the cavs (33-49)
in 26 games they only ended up beating 3 teams with winning records. olajuwon then came back in and joined a team that was 9 over .500 and they finished 22 over .500.[/QUOTE]
Very nice work, you got me there. That does explain the mystery of Houston's success without Olajuwon that year, but Barkley still had a significant offensive advantage over Hakeem, and played 11 more games. Houston's success with Hakeem averaging only 18 ppg after his return just shows the difference between Hakeem in the mid 90's under Rudy T when he became a fantastic passer, and late 80's/early 90's Hakeem.
[QUOTE]slightley better in the regular season, and easily better in the playoffs. drexler led his team to the best record in the nba, and the conference finals. drexler was just superb in the playoffs, with averages of 21.7ppg, 8.1rpg, 8.1apg, 2.1spg, and 1.0bpg[/QUOTE]
I'd expect the best record with a cast of Terry Porter, Kevin Duckworth, Buck Williams, Clifford Robinson, Jerome Kersey and Danny Ainge.
[QUOTE]well obviously barkley should have been playing, otherwise they might not have went 5-10[/QUOTE]
Players get injured, but there will also be a limit to how many games you're going with a team that loses twice as many games as they win when you're out.
[QUOTE]baskets are baskets, easy baskets or difficult baskets. i know i'd rather have my power forward being in the right spots for layups than shooting fade away 3s with 15 seconds left on the shot clock.[/QUOTE]
I'd be fine with it if this style proved anywhere near as successful in the playoffs. I didn't penalize Lebron this year for living on transition baskets because he kept getting them in the playoffs.
[QUOTE]malone was aslo the vastly superior defender at that time.[/QUOTE]
True, but not the great defender he'd become so this didn't make enough of a difference to offset Barkley's offensive advantage.
[QUOTE]it will be due to games missed and 15 games is a bit chunk of the season. pippen was another forward in the top 10 that year, infact he was ranked 2nd. and as for forwards in the all-nba teams 1st team should've been malone and pippen. second team dominique wilkins and chris mullin. third team would be larry nance and charles barkley[/QUOTE]
Pippen came on strong in the second half, enough to make one of my all-nba teams if I made them, but however high I end up ranking him for the entire season will also have quite a bit to do with his playoffs. He just wasn't considered to be on rkley's level yet.
Barkley definitely ranks over Mullin, not only was he the more dominant scorer, but he gave you a lot more rebounding, and defense isn't a determing factor between these 2, I'd use the same argument for Nique.
[QUOTE]firstly reggie lewis was a small forward. dumars was nice but not on the level of hawkins in this one particular season, the others are nowhere in the vicinity.[/QUOTE]
Dumars was better than Hawkins, in addition to his defense, he was also a 20+ ppg scorer and capable of playing point guard, which he did when Isiah was out, as well as sometimes alternating roles with Isiah playing off the ball. He averaged around 22/7 when Isiah was out, iirc.
[QUOTE]or was it because barkley had the type of game that was hard to adjust to as a teammate? i know for example that kj was on pace to be one of the great all-time guards before barkley decided to force a trade to the 56 win suns team..and his career fizzled not long after.[/QUOTE]
KJ had a ton of injuries around that time, look at how many games he missed. But when he was healthier in '94, he had another great season.
-
Re: Barkley: I'm better than Malone
[QUOTE=Shep]don't forget barkley played with hall of famers hakeem olajuwon, scottie pippen, clyde drexler, moses malone, julius erving, andrew toney, and maurice cheeks :applause:[/QUOTE]
[B]You forget Barkley was INJURED AND OVERWIGHT AGES 33 on
Hakeem was 33, Drexler was 34..PASSED THEIR PRIMES.
Moses Malone left for the 1985-86 Play-Offs so He Only Played with Him for a 1 SEASON as "Barkley Starting" while Malone had STOCKTON IN HIS OWN PRIME AND HIS PRIME...AND EATON IN HIS PRIME FOR 9 YEARS OR SO.
Dr J was 35-37 YEARS OLD AND PASSED HIS PRIME
And...Andrew Tone SUFFERED A CAREER ENDING INJURY in the 1985-86 SEASON.
CHEEKS? BETTER THAN STOCKTON? :no:
Its a Fact Barkley was Better than Malone for 10 Years in a Row
HIGHER EFF
HIGHER PER
HIGHER +/-
HIGHER SHOT MADE/MISSED DIFERENTIAL
MALONE COULD NEVER PLAY LIKE THIS IN THE PLAY-OFFS...HE NEVE WAS BIG IN THE PLAY-OFFS...BARKLEY WAS
[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vi-oVrsJ_20[/url]
[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KTMFTQFvO_8&feature=related[/url]
[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zs-XO5h5bAg[/url]
[/B]
-
Re: Barkley: I'm better than Malone
[QUOTE=D.J.]Going by their peaks and individual skills, Barkley was better than Malone. Better at creating, more efficient scorer, more versatile, better rebounder, better passer, and better in the clutch. A common misconception is that Barkley was a terrible defender. Barkley wasn't a terrible defender at all. He was however, a very lazy defender. He took many plays off on D. He also wasn't big on conditioning, unlike Malone, who was a gym rat.
Now as far as teammates. Some like to say that Barkley had way more help. Not true. Barkley's only real help was his rookie year, where he had Moses(25/13), Dr. J(20/5), Toney(18/5), and Cheeks(13/6), and reached the ECF.
In '86, Moses didn't play at all in the playoffs. Chuck led the way, averaging 25/16/6 with Dr. J playing respectably, but clearly declining...and Mo Cheeks putting up 21/7/5 in the playoffs and they were 1 win away from the ECF.
In '87, Moses was gone, Dr. J was on his last legs, and Toney was a bench player. Cheeks was the only other real dependable player.
Then from '88 on, no Moses or Dr. J and Cheeks left in '89. His sources of help were Cliff Robinson, Mike Gminski, Hersey Hawkins, Ron Anderson, and Johnny Dawkins.
There were 3 years where the 76ers greatly overachieved solely because of Barkley's play. The 1st one was in '86 where Moses didn't play at all in the playoffs and they came within 1 win of the ECF with Barkley averaging 25/16/6 in the playoffs. The 2nd one was in '90 where Barkley led the 76ers to 53 wins and was robbed of MVP. The 3rd one was in '91 where the 76ers swept Milwaukee in the first round with Barkley averaging 24/11/7/3 on 52% shooting in the three games, including a triple-double in game 2.
Barkley at his best was the best player in the world not named Michael Jordan. As great as Malone was, he was never at that level of greatness. Malone never singlehandedly took over games and led otherwise mediocre teammates to victory like Barkley did. Malone often folded under pressure, something Barkley didn't do. Barkley may have had games where he didn't play as well as he should have, but he never flat out choked. He actually elevated his play in the playoffs. My only issue with Charles was his laziness. He took many plays off and that is something Malone didn't do. The better player was clearly Charles Barkley. The better career however, was clearly Karl Malone.[/QUOTE]
:applause:
-
Re: Barkley: I'm better than Malone
[B]Round Mound[/B], I don't think you ever replied to this post
[QUOTE=Deuce Bigalow]Why does Kobe have 3 Playoff runs to the NBA Finals where he shot more efficiently than Barkley in his lone Playoff run to the NBA Finals?
Barkley '93 Playoffs: .488 eFG%, .552 TS%
Kobe '08 Playoffs: .514 eFG%, .577 TS%
Kobe '09 Playoffs: .492 eFG%, .564 TS% (won Championship)
Kobe '10 Playoffs: .506 eFG%, .567 TS% (won Championship)[/QUOTE]
-
Re: Barkley: I'm better than Malone
[QUOTE=Deuce Bigalow][B]Round Mound[/B], I don't think you ever replied to this post[/QUOTE]
[B]It gets quite EASy when you Play with the 2nd BEST CF in the League Pau Gasol IN YOU PRIME AND HIS PRIME. The 2-3rd Best Center in the League IN HIS PRIME AND YOUYR PRIME (Barkley neve had a Great Center in his OWN PRIME) in Bynum and the Best 6thman in the League Odom.
How About You Respond to This:
Barkley Higher PER Season and Play-Offs than > Bryant
Barkley Higher EFF Season and Play-Offs than > Bryant
Barkley Higher +/- Season and Play-Offs than > Bryant
Barkley Higher Made/Missed Shot Diferential Season and Play-Offs> Bryant
Barkley Higher WS Season and Play-Offs than > Bryant
Barkley Higher OWS Season and Play-Offs than > Bryant[/B]
[B]BARKLEY WAS THE 2ND OR 3D MOST DOMINANT PLAYER FROM 1985-1995 AFTER MJ AND MAYBE HAKEEM
WAS KOBE EVER DOUBLED THE WAY BARKLEY WAS? :no: [/B]
-
Re: Barkley: I'm better than Malone
[QUOTE=Round Mound][B]It gets quite EASy when you Play with the 2nd BEST CF in the League Pau Gasol IN YOU PRIME AND HIS PRIME. The 2-3rd Best Center in the League IN HIS PRIME AND YOUYR PRIME (Barkley neve had a Great Center in his OWN PRIME) in Bynum and the Best 6thman in the League Odom.
How About You Respond to This:
Barkley Higher PER Season and Play-Offs than > Bryant
Barkley Higher EFF Season and Play-Offs than > Bryant
Barkley Higher +/- Season and Play-Offs than > Bryant
Barkley Higher Made/Missed Shot Diferential Season and Play-Offs> Bryant
Barkley Higher WS Season and Play-Offs than > Bryant
Barkley Higher OWS Season and Play-Offs than > Bryant[/B]
[B]BARKLEY WAS THE 2ND OR 3D MOST DOMINANT PLAYER FROM 1985-1995 AFTER MJ AND MAYBE HAKEEM
WAS KOBE EVER DOUBLED THE WAY BARKLEY WAS? :no: [/B][/QUOTE]
:wtf: :roll:
What does Gasol and Bynum have to do with it?
Answer the question.
-
Re: Barkley: I'm better than Malone
[QUOTE=Deuce Bigalow]:wtf: :roll:
What does Gasol and Bynum have to do with it?
Answer the question.[/QUOTE]
[B]I did.
It gets quite easy when Gasol is Doubled and Bynum is in the Middle for Open Bryant Shots.
Bryant is and was Great but He Wasn`t and Isn`t a More Dominant Player than Barkley was. He wasn`t Close to as Doubled as Prime Barkley was. Prime Barkley was the 2nd Most Doubled Player Prior to Shaq[/B]
-
Re: Barkley: I'm better than Malone
[QUOTE]He was 4th or 5th in '88 behind Bird, MJ, Magic and possibly Hakeem.
He was 3rd in '89 behind Jordan and Magic.
He was 4th in '90 beind Jordan, Magic and Ewing.
He fell out of the top 5 in '92, but 16 is way too low.[/QUOTE]
in '88 the players ranked higher than barkley were michael jordan, magic johnson, larry bird, hakeem olajuwon, john stockton, isiah thomas, fat lever, james worthy, and dominique wilkins
in '89 the players ranked higher than barkley were jordan, johnson, olajuwon, thomas, kevin johnson, stockton, patrick ewing, worthy, tom chambers, and larry nance
in '90 the players ranked higher than barkley were jordan, david robinson, olajuwon, johnson, ewing, thomas, clyde drexler, stockton, and bird
in '92 barkley did not have the team success or individual success to be considered in the best 15 players in the nba.
[QUOTE]Pippen was nowhere near a top 2 player in '91 or Magic Johnson's level.[/QUOTE]
pippen's play in the playoffs proved he was the second best player in the nba
[QUOTE]Robinson wasn't terrible in the Warriors series, I'm not saying that, and his numbers look great out of context, but they're largely a product of playing a team like Don Nelson's Warriors. But the numbers weren't really a consideration, just from watching that series, I can say that he didn't dominate it like he should have(we seem to be in agreement on that part).[/QUOTE]
yeh he definately did not dominate that series like he should have, and was demoted from the second best player in the regular season to fourth best player after the playoffs because of it.
[QUOTE]As far as regular season, come to think of it, Robinson would be high on my list behind Jordan. It's between Magic and David Robinson for 2nd, though Magic had a deeper, more talented team that didn't deal with the same injuries that Robinson's Spurs did.[/QUOTE]
yeh magic did not make the top 5 most valuabe players in the regular season. after jordan and robinson it was stockton, pippen, and drexler rounding out the top 5.
[QUOTE]I don't have a big issue with you taking Robinson over Barkley as I said before. Robinson's defense is a major advantage, but Barkley's offensive dominance gives him the edge for me.[/QUOTE]
there was no real offensive advantage there. there was a massive defensive advantage to robinson, and offensively there was barely any advantage at all.
25.6ppg on 16.7fg, or 1.53 points per shot
compared to
27.6ppg on 17.4fg, or 1.59 points per shot
in the playoffs barkley stayed the same and robinson scored at a rate of over 2 points per shot
barkley had more assists because the ball was constantly in his hands
[QUOTE]You're definitely overrating Stockton. He did do a brilliant job of running Utah's offense, and he was a nice defensive player as well. Solid shooter, pretty good off the dribble, and he was a capable scorer. But he wasn't a great scorer due to both mentality and creativity. He lacked the superstar ability to create off the dribble and was often overly passive when Utah needed him to step up and score more. He had very few big scoring games throughout his career, I appreciate his consistency, but even Jerry Sloan called him out at times for passing up shots he should have taken, and being too passive.[/QUOTE]
you do not want your point guard to do all the scoring. he averaged the perfect number of points per game in 17.2, you do not want your point guard to shoot the ball all the time, he averaged 11.9fga per game. just because he doesn't score the ball at an all time level, he could contribute in alot more ways unlike barkley who if he wasn't scoring the ball he would be rendered useless.
[QUOTE]KJ is ahead of Stockton due to his ability to take over a game and dominant, while also being a pretty damn good passer. The Suns up tempo style probably helped his numbers a bit, but he was a nightmare with his crossover and automatic pull up mid-range shot. His scoring was a major advantage over Stockton's. He also led the league's 3rd best offense, who did have a lot of talent, but struggled mightily when KJ was out. KJ and Stockton were relatively close, which is why the playoffs seal the deal for me. KJ was considered by most to be the second best PG in the league that year. In a GM survey from before the playoffs, KJ finished second in best PG rankings behind Magic, and actually got quite a few votes for best PG, and he probably would have received more after his Suns upset the Lakers.[/QUOTE]
yeh at a top 4 pace in the league, kj definately was benefited from that high paced offense. stockton would average 18 points and 15 assists in that offense. the suns also had alot more help that season with depth that consisted of tom chambers, jeff hornacek, mark west (huge in the playoffs), dan majerle, and eddie johnson.
lol@gm survey's. there was magic and stockton, then there was kj and isiah thomas after the regular season. after the playoffs kj had slipped to fourth after magic, thomas, and stockton.
[QUOTE]Magic Johnson had his 2nd or 3rd best year and was just in a different class than either KJ or Stockton. His dominant post game, and proficient 3 point shooting that season allowed him to control a game so much offensively in addition to the fact that he was arguably the best passer of all time, and the Lakers were now able to run their offense through magic in the post. Magic had become an excellent passer out of double teams and when he was guarded 1 on 1, he scored most of the time.[/QUOTE]
magic was the best, just ahead of thomas.
[QUOTE]And the Suns upsetting the Lakers is different because I wouldn't say KJ even outplayed Magic. The Suns won because Dan Majerle primarily guarded Magic 1 on 1, and Magic made him pay with 30 ppg for the series and back to back 43 point games. But this strategy also proved very effective because it prevented the other Laker players from having success because they were used to feeding off Magic's double teams. And it also hurt the Lakers that Tom Chambers did a surprisingly good job defensively on Worthy.[/QUOTE]
magic just did not have a good playoffs, not for someone of his standards anyway, especially after the regular season he and the lakers had, and if he was any sort of defensive player would've been matched with kj. in any case he was still the best point guard and top 4 overall that season.
[QUOTE]I'd expect the best record with a cast of Terry Porter, Kevin Duckworth, Buck Williams, Clifford Robinson, Jerome Kersey and Danny Ainge.[/QUOTE]
lots of teams have hopes of having the best record, only 1 ended up with it. clyde drexler was that teams best player.
[QUOTE]Players get injured, but there will also be a limit to how many games you're going with a team that loses twice as many games as they win when you're out.[/QUOTE]
malone didn't get injured. his team got full value out of him and didn't have to pay him to sit on the bench.
[QUOTE]I'd be fine with it if this style proved anywhere near as successful in the playoffs. I didn't penalize Lebron this year for living on transition baskets because he kept getting them in the playoffs.[/QUOTE]
this style was easily more successful than barkley's style in the playoffs.
[QUOTE]True, but not the great defender he'd become so this didn't make enough of a difference to offset Barkley's offensive advantage.[/QUOTE]
there is no advantage
[QUOTE]Pippen came on strong in the second half, enough to make one of my all-nba teams if I made them, but however high I end up ranking him for the entire season will also have quite a bit to do with his playoffs. He just wasn't considered to be on rkley's level yet.[/QUOTE]
:lol
[QUOTE]Barkley definitely ranks over Mullin, not only was he the more dominant scorer, but he gave you a lot more rebounding, and defense isn't a determing factor between these 2, I'd use the same argument for Nique.[/QUOTE]
wilkins is easily over barkley here.
25.9ppg, 9.0rpg, 3.3apg, 1.5spg, 0.8bpg, 47%fg, 81 games, 43 wins, huge margin between him and his next best player
mullin, also is easily over barkley
25.7ppg, 5.4rpg, 4.0apg, 2.1spg, 0.8bpg, 54%fg, 82 games, 44 wins
barkley might have been the better player, but games played plays a bit part in these all-nba teams for me, as you are not much use sitting out injured or suspended when your team needs you out on the court contributing.
[QUOTE]Dumars was better than Hawkins, in addition to his defense, he was also a 20+ ppg scorer and capable of playing point guard, which he did when Isiah was out, as well as sometimes alternating roles with Isiah playing off the ball. He averaged around 22/7 when Isiah was out, iirc.[/QUOTE]
there was no aspect dumars was better than hawkins in this particular season, besides on ball defense.
-
Re: Barkley: I'm better than Malone
[QUOTE=Round Mound][B]I did.
It gets quite easy when Gasol is Doubled and Bynum is in the Middle for Open Bryant Shots.
Bryant is and was Great but He Wasn`t and Isn`t a More Dominant Player than Barkley was. He wasn`t Close to as Doubled as Prime Barkley was. Prime Barkley was the 2nd Most Doubled Player Prior to Shaq[/B][/QUOTE]
Gasol and Bynum got doubled in '08-'10 Playoffs??
:roll: :roll: :roll:
-
Re: Barkley: I'm better than Malone
You can say Barkley was better than Malone in the year of 1992.
But after that, Malone's better.
B/c Barkley always out of shape to start the season. Malone always in great shape.
BTW they both suck in crunch time.
Malone always shrink.
And Barkley thought he can take over the game the way MJ did. but always end up with stupid three-pointer.
-
Re: Barkley: I'm better than Malone
[QUOTE=Shep]in '88 the players ranked higher than barkley were michael jordan, magic johnson, larry bird, hakeem olajuwon, john stockton, isiah thomas, fat lever, james worthy, and dominique wilkins[/QUOTE]
You're correct on your first 4, and that may even be the correct order.
Nique was close, I'd rank him 6th, this was probably his 2nd or 3rd best season. The others don't really have a case.
[QUOTE]in '89 the players ranked higher than barkley were jordan, johnson, olajuwon, thomas, kevin johnson, stockton, patrick ewing, worthy, tom chambers, and larry nance[/QUOTE]
Correct on Jordan and Magic, the top 2 in that order. Nobody would argue against those 2 in their prime. Hakeem was close, I have him just behind at 4th, but had to think about it, so no big argument here.
Ewing? No, he might be top 5, but he wasn't better than Barkley yet.
I can't see a case for any of those players mentioned other than the Michael and Magic who were better, and Olajuwon who you could make a case for.
[QUOTE]in '90 the players ranked higher than barkley were jordan, david robinson, olajuwon, johnson, ewing, thomas, clyde drexler, stockton, and bird[/QUOTE]
Correct about Jordasn, Magic and Ewing in that order, but no more. Hakeem and Robinson were relatively close. The others weren't even debatable. I can't see a case for any of them.
[QUOTE]in '92 barkley did not have the team success or individual success to be considered in the best 15 players in the nba.[/QUOTE]
Barkley did have individual success. 23/11/4 on 55% shooting. How many can do that? Despite a lazy season, Barkley's talent still put him above enough players to comfortably make the top 10.
You're literally putting Barkley below quite a few players, I've never once heard anyone claim were as good as Barkley, much less better.
[QUOTE]pippen's play in the playoffs proved he was the second best player in the nba[/QUOTE]
Nah, I'm as big of a Pippen fan as anyone, and his playoff run was excellent, but he was a tier below the guys like Jordan, Magic, Barkley, Robinson, Malone, Ewing and probably still Olajuwon despite the 26 missed games. And even a guy like Drexler who had similar weaknesses to Pippen still seemed to be the better player, and was widely regarded as such.
yeh he definately did not dominate that series like he should have, and was demoted from the second best player in the regular season to fourth best player after the playoffs because of it.
[QUOTE]yeh magic did not make the top 5 most valuabe players in the regular season. after jordan and robinson it was stockton, pippen, and drexler rounding out the top 5.[/QUOTE]
I'm really having trouble seeing how you end up putting Stockton in the class of the top 5 players, when he was very good at what he did, but didn't have the dominance to be put in that group, and certainly not to compete with Magic. Stockton wasn't even the MVP of his own team(though he was closer to Malone from '88-'91 than he was after).
Drexler's value on a basketball court wasn't comparable. And Pippen couldn't impact a game like Magic either, and case for MVP is clearly worse considering he was on the same team as the MVP and the best player ever who was arguably at his peak.
[QUOTE]there was no real offensive advantage there. there was a massive defensive advantage to robinson, and offensively there was barely any advantage at all.
25.6ppg on 16.7fg, or 1.53 points per shot
compared to
27.6ppg on 17.4fg, or 1.59 points per shot[/QUOTE]
Barkley was a much better offensive player. He was almost impossible to deal with when he had his back to the basket which is why he was probably getting doubled and receiving more defensive attention than anyone in the league. And he was a better passer, particularly at that point. Robinson became one of the league's best passing centers around '93-'96, and also improved his jump shot around then.
Regardless of Barkley having better numbers, he was simply the better offensive player at that end, while Robinson never achieved offensive dominance. This was because he never had a go to move with his back to the basket, didn't really have the right build for being a post player, lacked good footwork and just seemed awkward and uncomfortable backing his man down. This is why his scoring average usually dropped dramatically despite scoring a lot in the regular season due to his unmatched ability to run the floor, being a perfect target for alley oops, being too quick for opposing centers to deal with when he faced up(though he always attacked the basket less in the postseason) and later, adding a decent jump shot. But Robinson was a dominant defensive player and a good to very good offensive player. Barkley was a dominant offensive player.
[QUOTE]in the playoffs barkley stayed the same and robinson scored at a rate of over 2 points per shot[/QUOTE]
Barkley played 2 series, and didn't face Don Nelson's Warriors. When a slightly past his prime Barkley faced Nelson's Warriors(who had a better frontcourt in '94) he averaged 37/13/6/3 on 61 FG%. Opponents numbers vs Nelson's Warriors were almost always inflated.
[QUOTE]barkley had more assists because the ball was constantly in his hands[/QUOTE]
He was a better passer too, not that assists sum up passing ability.
[QUOTE]you do not want your point guard to do all the scoring. he averaged the perfect number of points per game in 17.2, you do not want your point guard to shoot the ball all the time, he averaged 11.9fga per game. just because he doesn't score the ball at an all time level, he could contribute in alot more ways unlike barkley who if he wasn't scoring the ball he would be rendered useless.[/QUOTE]
I appreciate Stockton's game, he did the job of a pure PG extremely well, but I also want my point guard to step up and carry a team when necessary. Stockton just wasn't comfortable doing that. And that's why he was never a first tier, top 5 player and MVP candidate. Even a guy like Jason Kidd who wasn't the most talented scorer, would step up, assert himself and carry a team when he had to.
[QUOTE]yeh at a top 4 pace in the league, kj definately was benefited from that high paced offense. stockton would average 18 points and 15 assists in that offense. the suns also had alot more help that season with depth that consisted of tom chambers, jeff hornacek, mark west (huge in the playoffs), dan majerle, and eddie johnson.
lol@gm survey's. there was magic and stockton, then there was kj and isiah thomas after the regular season. after the playoffs kj had slipped to fourth after magic, thomas, and stockton.[/QUOTE]
I don't think KJ benefited from the Suns pace anymore than Stockton benefited from Sloan's system and having a team who fit perfect with him in Malone.
Besides, I'm not basing my selection of KJ over Stockton primarily on numbers. KJ's explosiveness and duel threat of taking over a game with scoring or setting up his teammates as well as his superior playoff run is why I chose KJ. It's not a big gap for me, but I'm confident in choosing KJ that year.
And while the Suns did looked loaded on paper, and they clearly had some great players like Chambers, Eddie Johnson and Hornacek, their offense wasn't looking so hot when KJ was out. With them, they're a prolific offensive team that's almost impossible to stop.
[QUOTE]magic just did not have a good playoffs, not for someone of his standards anyway, especially after the regular season he and the lakers had, and if he was any sort of defensive player would've been matched with kj. in any case he was still the best point guard and top 4 overall that season.[/QUOTE]
He controlled the game too much offensively with his post game, outside shot, transition game, and of course, his passing from anywhere on the court to be ranked anywhere less than 2nd despite Ewing's dominant year.
I agree about Magic's defense, but he probably had his 2nd best year in '90, behind only '87 and possibly '89.
[QUOTE]lots of teams have hopes of having the best record, only 1 ended up with it. clyde drexler was that teams best player.[/QUOTE]
And only one team had the talent Portland had.
[QUOTE]malone didn't get injured. his team got full value out of him and didn't have to pay him to sit on the bench.[/QUOTE]
I'm not going to deny that Malone's durability is an advantage, but he wasn't better out on the basketball court, and Barkley's injuries exposed his cast as limited.
[QUOTE]this style was easily more successful than barkley's style in the playoffs.[/QUOTE]
Absolutely not.
[QUOTE]there is no advantage[/QUOTE]
That's just laughable, all one has to do is watch a few games from both players that year to see Barkley's superiority offensively. Not even a peak '98 Karl Malone can compete with prime '88-'93 Barkley offensively.
[QUOTE]wilkins is easily over barkley here.
25.9ppg, 9.0rpg, 3.3apg, 1.5spg, 0.8bpg, 47%fg, 81 games, 43 wins, huge margin between him and his next best player
mullin, also is easily over barkley
25.7ppg, 5.4rpg, 4.0apg, 2.1spg, 0.8bpg, 54%fg, 82 games, 44 wins
barkley might have been the better player, but games played plays a bit part in these all-nba teams for me, as you are not much use sitting out injured or suspended when your team needs you out on the court contributing.[/QUOTE]
I'm not going to argue with your criteria for all-nba teams since you acknowledge Barkley was the better player.
[QUOTE]there was no aspect dumars was better than hawkins in this particular season, besides on ball defense.[/QUOTE]
Dumars was also clearly the better passer and playmaker. Hawkins has the edge as a scorer, but I don't think the gap is that big.
Reggie Lewis was a shooting guard by the way. Kevin Gamble was the small forward in the starting lineup, and Bird was the small forward when McHale came into the game.
-
Re: Barkley: I'm better than Malone
[B]Barkley Was Better than Malone for 10 Seasons.
[U]From 85 to 95[/U]
Higher PER: Top 10 All Time Season and Play-Offs!!!
Higher WS
Higher OWS
Higher OS
Higher +/-: Top 5 All Time!!!
Higher Shot Made/Missed Diferential: Top 4 All Time!!!
Malone Was Better For Barkley`s Last 5-6 Seasons: When He Whent to Houston as a Crippled Overweight Knee Broken and Back Aching Shell Former of Himself (Injuries, Gained Weight, Lost Agility, Lost Explosivness, Lost Potence, Lost Leaping Ability)[/B]
-
Re: Barkley: I'm better than Malone
[QUOTE=Shep]in '88 the players ranked higher than barkley were michael jordan, magic johnson, larry bird, hakeem olajuwon, john stockton, isiah thomas, fat lever, james worthy, and dominique wilkins
[/QUOTE]
wait a minute? what? fat friggin lever over barkley? :roll:
in 1988-1989
barkley had
25.8/12.5/3.9/1.9stl/.8blk .579%
hakeem had
24.8/13.5/1.8/2.6stl/3.4blk .508%
pretty damn comparable IMO. barkley was no doubt top 7 that year as far as production goes
-
Re: Barkley: I'm better than Malone
Fat Lever over Charles Barkley??? :facepalm What is ISH coming to? I had to do a double take because I thought my eyes were deceiving me.
-
Re: Barkley: I'm better than Malone
[QUOTE=Linspired]wait a minute? what? fat friggin lever over barkley? :roll:
in 1988-1989
barkley had
25.8/12.5/3.9/1.9stl/.8blk .579%
hakeem had
24.8/13.5/1.8/2.6stl/3.4blk .508%
pretty damn comparable IMO. barkley was no doubt top 7 that year as far as production goes[/QUOTE]
[B]Shep is the Biggest Barkley Hater on the ISHs :rolleyes: :facepalm
I bet he is a Jazz Fan. Cause Most Barkley Haters are Cockriding Stockton-To-Malone`s :roll: [/B]
-
Re: Barkley: I'm better than Malone
[QUOTE]correct on your first 4, and that may even be the correct order.
Nique was close, I'd rank him 6th, this was probably his 2nd or 3rd best season. The others don't really have a case.[/QUOTE]
the others easily have a better case.
stockton: 14.7ppg, 2.9rpg, 13.8apg, 3.0spg, 57%fg, 36%3p, 84%ft.
utah's record: 47-35
playoff record: 6-5, conference simifinalists
in his first season as a starter, stockton is top 4 in the league in field goal percentage (the fact he was fourth in the entire league is astounding as a point guard), top 2 in steals per game, led the nba in assists per game by almost 2 assists (and recorded the second highest assists per game average in nba history), was his teams best player in the regular season, and he also stepped up huge in the playoffs.
the jazz demolished the heavily favoured portland trail blazers in the first round, before succumbing to the eventual champion lakers in the conference semi finals in 7 games.
stockton's averages in the playoffs you ask? only 19.8ppg, 4.1rpg, 14.8apg, 3.4spg, all on 51%fg, including 29 points, 20 assists, and 5 steals in the game 7 loss to the lakers.
isiah thomas: 19.5ppg, 3.4rpg, 8.4apg, 1.7spg
detroit's record: 54-28 (second best record in the eastern conference)
playoff record: 14-9, nba finalists
thomas was the piston's best player in the regular season, and out of every player who participated in the playoffs, he stepped up the most.
after a tough first round against the malone's of washington, the pistons destroyed the best player in the nba and his chicago bulls in 5 games. before bullying the defending eastern conference champion boston celtics to take that series in 6, winning 2 games on the road in the process.
they then came within 3 points off pulling off one of the biggest upsets in nba history, losing game 7 to the 62 win laker outfit away from home.
thomas's averages in the playoffs: 21.9ppg, 4.7rpg, 8.7apg, 2.9spg
fat lever: 18.9ppg, 8.1rpg, 7.8apg, 2.7spg
denvers record: 54-28 (second best record in the western conference)
playoff record: 5-6, conference finalists
fat was the nuggets best player in the regular season, and the playoffs. he was also named to the all defensive second team and was one of the best all-round players in the league. if it wasn't for him missing some playoff games they probably would have taken dallas out, and made the conference finals.
lever's averages in the playoffs: 17.0ppg, 9.3rpg, 7.0apg, 1.9spg
james worthy: 19.7ppg, 5.0rpg, 3.9apg, 1.0spg, 0.7bpg, 53%fg
la's record: 62-20 (best in the nba)
playoff record: 15-9, champions
worthy was the lakers third best player in the regular season, but because his superb playoffs he was regarded as their second best by the end of the playoffs, and he stepped up just as much as magic johnson. and he stepped up huge when it mattered most. in 3 game 7 wins by the lakers in the postseason, worthy averaged 29ppg, 9.7rpg, 6.3apg, and 2.3spg.
worthy's averages in the playoffs: 21.1ppg, 5.8rpg, 4.4apg, 1.4spg, 0.8bpg, 52%fg
nique is easy aswell, barkley has no case over any of these players.
[QUOTE]Correct on Jordan and Magic, the top 2 in that order. Nobody would argue against those 2 in their prime. Hakeem was close, I have him just behind at 4th, but had to think about it, so no big argument here.
Ewing? No, he might be top 5, but he wasn't better than Barkley yet.
I can't see a case for any of those players mentioned other than the Michael and Magic who were better, and Olajuwon who you could make a case for.
[/QUOTE]
no case can be made for barkley over any players here.
[QUOTE]Correct about Jordasn, Magic and Ewing in that order, but no more. Hakeem and Robinson were relatively close. The others weren't even debatable. I can't see a case for any of them.[/QUOTE]
no case can be made for barkley over any players here.
[QUOTE]Barkley did have individual success. 23/11/4 on 55% shooting. How many can do that? Despite a lazy season, Barkley's talent still put him above enough players to comfortably make the top 10.
You're literally putting Barkley below quite a few players, I've never once heard anyone claim were as good as Barkley, much less better.[/QUOTE]
what is 23/11/4 if you aren't making the playoffs. nice kevin love season here from barkley.
[QUOTE]Nah, I'm as big of a Pippen fan as anyone, and his playoff run was excellent, but he was a tier below the guys like Jordan, Magic, Barkley, Robinson, Malone, Ewing and probably still Olajuwon despite the 26 missed games. And even a guy like Drexler who had similar weaknesses to Pippen still seemed to be the better player, and was widely regarded as such.[/QUOTE]
no case can be made for anyone over pippen that year besides jordan.
[QUOTE]I'm really having trouble seeing how you end up putting Stockton in the class of the top 5 players, when he was very good at what he did, but didn't have the dominance to be put in that group, and certainly not to compete with Magic. Stockton wasn't even the MVP of his own team(though he was closer to Malone from '88-'91 than he was after). [/QUOTE]
not sure where you are getting this from. stockton was easily the best and most valuable player on his team, he was also top 3 most valuabe player in '88.
[QUOTE]Drexler's value on a basketball court wasn't comparable. And Pippen couldn't impact a game like Magic either, and case for MVP is clearly worse considering he was on the same team as the MVP and the best player ever who was arguably at his peak.[/QUOTE]
there is alot of individual sacrifice you have to make as a second best player on a championship team, or a team with the best record in the nba. so with this in mind pippen was ranked correctly.
[QUOTE]Barkley was a much better offensive player. He was almost impossible to deal with when he had his back to the basket which is why he was probably getting doubled and receiving more defensive attention than anyone in the league. And he was a better passer, particularly at that point. Robinson became one of the league's best passing centers around '93-'96, and also improved his jump shot around then.[/QUOTE]
where is the results of being a MUCH better offensive player? there is no results, barkley lost time and time again due to his selfishness and bone headed decisions.
[QUOTE]Regardless of Barkley having better numbers[/QUOTE]
:roll:
[QUOTE]he was simply the better offensive player at that end[/QUOTE]
destroyed
[QUOTE]while Robinson never achieved offensive dominance. This was because he never had a go to move with his back to the basket, didn't really have the right build for being a post player, lacked good footwork and just seemed awkward and uncomfortable backing his man down. This is why his scoring average usually dropped dramatically despite scoring a lot in the regular season due to his unmatched ability to run the floor, being a perfect target for alley oops, being too quick for opposing centers to deal with when he faced up(though he always attacked the basket less in the postseason) and later, adding a decent jump shot. But Robinson was a dominant defensive player and a good to very good offensive player. Barkley was a dominant offensive player.[/QUOTE]
lol at this offensive dominance. barkley never achieved any dominance ever. except for 1 or 2 good seasons his career was a disappointment. it was a pity he never had any work ethic at all, because after 1986 where barkley proved himself to be one of the best 5 players in the nba after only 2 years in the nba, his career fizzled..its just sad he couldn't keep that momentum going or else he might have been considered among the all time greats.
-
Re: Barkley: I'm better than Malone
[QUOTE]Barkley played 2 series, and didn't face Don Nelson's Warriors. When a slightly past his prime Barkley faced Nelson's Warriors(who had a better frontcourt in '94) he averaged 37/13/6/3 on 61 FG%. Opponents numbers vs Nelson's Warriors were almost always inflated.[/QUOTE]
offensive dominance :sleeping
[QUOTE]appreciate Stockton's game, he did the job of a pure PG extremely well, but I also want my point guard to step up and carry a team when necessary. Stockton just wasn't comfortable doing that. And that's why he was never a first tier, top 5 player and MVP candidate. Even a guy like Jason Kidd who wasn't the most talented scorer, would step up, assert himself and carry a team when he had to.[/QUOTE]
when did he not carry the team? he was a top 5 player a number of years, and also top mvp candidate a number of years, including top 3 in '88.
[QUOTE]I don't think KJ benefited from the Suns pace anymore than Stockton benefited from Sloan's system and having a team who fit perfect with him in Malone.[/QUOTE]
stockton would have definately benefited from playing at a high pace team, with a number of potential 20 ppg scorers rather than 1.
[QUOTE]Besides, I'm not basing my selection of KJ over Stockton primarily on numbers. KJ's explosiveness and duel threat of taking over a game with scoring or setting up his teammates as well as his superior playoff run is why I chose KJ. It's not a big gap for me, but I'm confident in choosing KJ that year.[/QUOTE]
fair enough. despite kj's better playoff, i'd still take stockton due to the gap being massive in the regular season.
[QUOTE]And only one team had the talent Portland had.[/QUOTE]
they had all of the key players "talent" there 2 years earlier and they finished below .500
[QUOTE]I'm not going to deny that Malone's durability is an advantage, but he wasn't better out on the basketball court, and Barkley's injuries exposed his cast as limited.[/QUOTE]
actually he was easily better out on the basketball court
[QUOTE]Absolutely not.[/QUOTE]
:facepalm
[QUOTE]That's just laughable, all one has to do is watch a few games from both players that year to see Barkley's superiority offensively. Not even a peak '98 Karl Malone can compete with prime '88-'93 Barkley offensively.[/QUOTE]
i've watched more than a few games.
[QUOTE]Dumars was also clearly the better passer and playmaker. Hawkins has the edge as a scorer, but I don't think the gap is that big.[/QUOTE]
dumars was nice, but hawkins stepped up more than barkley and was huge. really can't imagine dumars having games like 26/10/6/6, 30/5/7 etc.
lets compare the two in their respective series' vs chicago in 1991
hawkins: 19.8ppg, 5.8rpg, 3apg, 1.4spg, 1.4bpg
dumars: 12.5ppg, 2rpg, 2.5apg, 1.5spg, 0.25bpg, 35%fg
ya..dumars was the man!:roll:
-
Re: Barkley: I'm better than Malone
[QUOTE=Shep]the others easily have a better case.
stockton: 14.7ppg, 2.9rpg, 13.8apg, 3.0spg, 57%fg, 36%3p, 84%ft.
utah's record: 47-35
playoff record: 6-5, conference simifinalists
in his first season as a starter, stockton is top 4 in the league in field goal percentage (the fact he was fourth in the entire league is astounding as a point guard), top 2 in steals per game, led the nba in assists per game by almost 2 assists (and recorded the second highest assists per game average in nba history), was his teams best player in the regular season, and he also stepped up huge in the playoffs.
the jazz demolished the heavily favoured portland trail blazers in the first round, before succumbing to the eventual champion lakers in the conference semi finals in 7 games.
stockton's averages in the playoffs you ask? only 19.8ppg, 4.1rpg, 14.8apg, 3.4spg, all on 51%fg, including 29 points, 20 assists, and 5 steals in the game 7 loss to the lakers.[/QUOTE]
Utah played at the 6th fastest pace in '88, and we saw many point guards throughout the 80's put up video game assist numbers becasuse of all the easy baskets in transition.
Stockton also had the power forward who ran the floor better than anyone at his position, and finished as well as anyone, which certainly didn't hurt his assist numbers on a running team.
And as far as team success, well there was Karl Malone of course, but equally important is that Utah was the best defensive team in the league, but only the 16th best offensive team out of 23 teams. So how much of Utah's team success can be attributed to Stockton? Some certainly, but he wasn't carrying this team, he was a fine defensive point guard, but he wasn't anchoring that defense, Mark Eaton was.
In fact, Barkley's Sixers were a much better offensive team than Utah.
The game isn't all about stats, but Barkley averaged 28.3 ppg, 11.9 rpg, 3.2 apg, 1.3 spg, 1.3 bpg, 58.7 FG%, 66.5 TS%.
[QUOTE]isiah thomas: 19.5ppg, 3.4rpg, 8.4apg, 1.7spg
detroit's record: 54-28 (second best record in the eastern conference)
playoff record: 14-9, nba finalists
thomas was the piston's best player in the regular season, and out of every player who participated in the playoffs, he stepped up the most.
after a tough first round against the malone's of washington, the pistons destroyed the best player in the nba and his chicago bulls in 5 games. before bullying the defending eastern conference champion boston celtics to take that series in 6, winning 2 games on the road in the process.
they then came within 3 points off pulling off one of the biggest upsets in nba history, losing game 7 to the 62 win laker outfit away from home.
thomas's averages in the playoffs: 21.9ppg, 4.7rpg, 8.7apg, 2.9spg[/QUOTE]
Isiah was too streaky to be compared with Barkley. He shot 46.3% in the regular season and 43.7% in the playoffs. Barkley as you know shot 58.7%.
And how much of Detroit's success was due to their top 2 defense and the fact that they outrebounded opponents by 3 rpg?
Or the team's depth? Isiah's cast was Adrian Dantley, Dennis Rodman, Joe Dumars, Bill Laimbeer, Vinnie Johnson, James Edwards, Rick Mahorn and John Salley.
I'm not sure why beating Chicago is that significant. They did not have much surrounding Jordan.
Detroit beat Boston because they didn't have a bench and Bird shot 35%.
[QUOTE]fat lever: 18.9ppg, 8.1rpg, 7.8apg, 2.7spg
denvers record: 54-28 (second best record in the western conference)
playoff record: 5-6, conference finalists
fat was the nuggets best player in the regular season, and the playoffs. he was also named to the all defensive second team and was one of the best all-round players in the league. if it wasn't for him missing some playoff games they probably would have taken dallas out, and made the conference finals.
lever's averages in the playoffs: 17.0ppg, 9.3rpg, 7.0apg, 1.9spg[/QUOTE]
Fat was also not an elite player. The numbers had a lot to do with Denver's unbelievable pace when they played for Doug Moe, and the rebounding was not only helped by the pace, but also the fact that Denver was a pathetic rebounding team.
I wouldn't say that a guy who averaged 18.9 ppg and 7.8 apg on 47.3% shooting on a team with the fastest pace has any case over a legend who was approaching or entering his prime.
Lever didn't have any devastating moves, he didn't seem like an elite shooter, and he didn't seem to stand out as one of the best passers in the league.
[QUOTE]james worthy: 19.7ppg, 5.0rpg, 3.9apg, 1.0spg, 0.7bpg, 53%fg
la's record: 62-20 (best in the nba)
playoff record: 15-9, champions
worthy was the lakers third best player in the regular season, but because his superb playoffs he was regarded as their second best by the end of the playoffs, and he stepped up just as much as magic johnson. and he stepped up huge when it mattered most. in 3 game 7 wins by the lakers in the postseason, worthy averaged 29ppg, 9.7rpg, 6.3apg, and 2.3spg.
worthy's averages in the playoffs: 21.1ppg, 5.8rpg, 4.4apg, 1.4spg, 0.8bpg, 52%fg[/QUOTE]
Worthy was the Lakers second best player in both the regular season and playoffs. He always did step up big in the playoffs, hence the nickname "Big Game James", but being fortunate enough to play on a stacked team with a top 10 player of all time in his prime, who got him a lot of easy baskets doesn't make him a better player than Barkley.
[QUOTE]what is 23/11/4 if you aren't making the playoffs. nice kevin love season here from barkley.[/QUOTE]
Even when Barkley wasn't motivated like in '92, he was much better than Love could dream of being. Love isn't elite at getting his own shot, and doesn't have to be doubled constantly like Barkley, Love doesn't shoot 55%, and Love is an even worse defender than Barkley. Plus, Love hasn't even won 35 games.
What happened to the Sixers after Barkley left? They had the same players plus an excellent addition Jeff Hornacek and a solid rookie Clarence Weatherspoon, but they dropped to 26-56.
I can drop Barkley due to him being unmotivated and causing problems with trade demands and trashing teammates, but there's a limit. He's obviously behind Jordan, Ewing, Malone, Robinson, Hakeem and you could argue that dropped below Pippen.
[QUOTE]there is alot of individual sacrifice you have to make as a second best player on a championship team, or a team with the best record in the nba. so with this in mind pippen was ranked correctly.[/QUOTE]
Pippen didn't sacrifice all that much, when he improved and entered his prime, he was capable of putting up similar numbers when he was winning titles in '92, '96 and '97 as he was when Jordan was gone in '94 and '95.
[QUOTE]where is the results of being a MUCH better offensive player? there is no results, barkley lost time and time again due to his selfishness and bone headed decisions.[/QUOTE]
Barkley got to the finals as the best player on his team, something Robinson never did.
[QUOTE]lol at this offensive dominance. barkley never achieved any dominance ever. except for 1 or 2 good seasons his career was a disappointment. it was a pity he never had any work ethic at all, because after 1986 where barkley proved himself to be one of the best 5 players in the nba after only 2 years in the nba, his career fizzled..its just sad he couldn't keep that momentum going or else he might have been considered among the all time greats.[/QUOTE]
Barkley wasn't one of the top 5 players in '86, and he did get significantly better after that, he was raw in '86 compared to his prime. He was at his best from '88-'93. And Barkley is considered one of the all time greats.
[QUOTE=Shep]
when did he not carry the team? he was a top 5 player a number of years, and also top mvp candidate a number of years, including top 3 in '88.[/QUOTE]
Stockton almost never carried the team. He was either too reluctant to take over a game or incapable. He had just 11 games in the regular season where he scored 30 or more points, and never more than 34. And in the playoffs he had just two, 34 points and 30 points. And not surprisingly, they were both vs Nelson's Warriors in losses.
[QUOTE]stockton would have definately benefited from playing at a high pace team, with a number of potential 20 ppg scorers rather than 1.[/QUOTE]
I can't see Stockton being in a better situation for his game and mentality.
[QUOTE]fair enough. despite kj's better playoff, i'd still take stockton due to the gap being massive in the regular season.[/QUOTE]
I don't think the regular season gap is massive, but I don't have a problem with anyone taking Stockton. That's why I said I don't think the gap is big.
[QUOTE]they had all of the key players "talent" there 2 years earlier and they finished below .500[/QUOTE]
Which just says that they underachieved.
[QUOTE]dumars was nice, but hawkins stepped up more than barkley and was huge. really can't imagine dumars having games like 26/10/6/6, 30/5/7 etc.
lets compare the two in their respective series' vs chicago in 1991
hawkins: 19.8ppg, 5.8rpg, 3apg, 1.4spg, 1.4bpg
dumars: 12.5ppg, 2rpg, 2.5apg, 1.5spg, 0.25bpg, 35%fg
ya..dumars was the man!:roll:[/QUOTE]
That's only one series. For the entire season Hawkins averaged 22.1 ppg, 3.9 rpg, 3.7 apg, 2.7 TO, 2.2 spg on 47.2 FG%/59.2 TS%, while Dumars averaged 20.4 ppg, 2.3 rpg, 5.5 apg, 2.4 TO, 1.1 spg on 48.1 FG%/55.2 TS%
So numbers are similar, though Dumars stats also came on a stacked team.
And Dumars averaged 21.8 ppg, 2.6 rpg, 7.1 apg, 2.9 TO, 1 spg, 46.7 FG%, 53.9 TS% in 33 games as the point guard without Isiah, and Detroit was 19-14 in those games.
But I don't see how Hawkins is better when Dumars is relatively close as a scorer, but much better as a defensive player, much more versatile, and a much better playmaker who is a proven winner.
-
Re: Barkley: I'm better than Malone
Malone was in the best shape of the NBA. Go to google and look at his conditioning. 1 hour on the stairmaster at a level 12, stadium stairs, sprints, 1 hour of weights, then 1 hour hair more of the stairmaster.
Some days he would do 6 hours of labor in his barn. The guy was a freak. Very ripped.