View Single Post
Old 06-28-2012, 03:41 AM   #35
Shep
Decent college freshman
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,549
Shep is considered somewhat coolShep is considered somewhat coolShep is considered somewhat cool
Default Re: Barkley: I'm better than Malone

Quote:
I agree with almost all of your rankings, except Barkley was better than Malone in '91. Charles was the 3rd best player that year behind only Michael and Magic
actually he was 9th. behind jordan, scottie pippen, magic, david robinson, john stockton, hakeem olajuwon, karl malone, and clyde drexler.
Quote:
He was right up there with Jordan, Bernard King and Orlando Woolridge for the scoring title the first few months and having easily his best scoring season before injuries averaging 30.8 ppg, 10.4 rpg, 3.7 apg, 59.6 FG% over his first 35 games and Philly was 21-14, they went just 2-5 between his return, and ultimately went 39-28 when he played, and just 5-10 without him showing his impact. Barkley still finished at 27.6 ppg, 10.1 rpg, 4.2 apg, 57 FG%. Despite a mediocre cast, which Barkley was used to in his prime, they made it to the second round, and Charles had a respectable playoff run individually, while Malone was far more underwhelming in the playoffs. I've only seen 1 game from the Milwaukee series, but the entire Chicago series. Charles averaging 23.7 ppg, 11 rpg, 7 apg, 2.7 spg on 52%. Not much he could've done in the Chicago series. He averaged 25.6 ppg, 10.2 rpg, 5.4 apg on 64%, but MJ was in his prime, or arguably at his peak playing nearly flawless ball, Pippen really emerged in the second half and the playoffs becoming arguably the best small forward in the game, the Bulls adjusted to the triangle and the supporting cast had become pretty solid.
although i'll admit barkley had slightly the better playoff, malone had a much better regular season, and this is the difference here.

malone averaged 29.0ppg, 11.8rpg, 3.3apg, 1.1spg, 1.0bpg, and 3.0topg on 53%fg on a 54 win team
barkley averaged 27.6ppg, 10.1rpg, 4.2apg, 1.6spg, 0.5bpg, and 3.1topg on 57%fg on a 44 win team

malone deserved 1st team all-nba honors, while barkley only deserved to be named to the 3rd team.

as for an underwelming supporting cast?
hersey hawkins was the third best shotting guard in the nba only behind jordan and drexler. hawkins stepped up his level of play in the playoffs more than barkley, and averaged 20.9ppg, 5.8rpg, 3.4apg, 2.5spg, and 1.3bpg, while shooting 47% from the field and 54% from the 3 point line, and they had fine role players like gilliam, mahorn, and anderson.
Quote:
But other than our disagreement on '91, you're listing Barkley as better during every other year in his prime from '88-'93 and there was not a big difference between the 2 in '94 and '95. Charles was playing better ball before his injuries averaging 24.5 ppg, 12 rpg, 5.1 apg, 1.9 spg, 52.7 FG% and Phoenix was 22-6. He was not the same after that, and really looked incapable of consistently reaching his prime level by the Houston series when Otis Thorpe often looked to be outplaying him before Thorpe's own injury. So that's why I'd probably lean towards Malone in '94. And '94 was the start of Malone being a more complete player.
yeh barkley was better than malone most years of his prime because malone hadn't entered his yet.
Quote:
Charles started the season late in '95, but worked his way back and came on strong averaging 26.1 ppg, 11.8 rpg, 3.8 apg in the second half of the season, though injuries took their toll again by the Houston series. He was really laboring in that memorable game 7 despite a 47/12 game earlier in the postseason to close out Portland. Though '95 was one of the rare times Malone didn't disappoint me in the playoffs despite the first round loss. As funny as it sounds, Hakeem's 47 win Rockets were better and more talented than Malone's 60 win Jazz, particularly with a rejuvenated Clyde Drexler having three 30+ games in the 5 game series including 41/9/6 in the same game Hakeem dropped 40 in.
barkley had a better playoff than malone in '95, and it did make it close, but not close enough to combat malone's regular season domination.

at the end of the day malone and barkley were individually ranked based on what they did on the court, what isn't taken into consideration when ranking individual seasons is games played. if barkley played in as many games consistently as malone did, then he'd be alot closer in the all time rankings (which take into consideration percentage of games played). unfortunately for barkley and his teams, he was off the court alot of the time, which was obviously of no value to his teams. and finally, malone was voted as the nba's most valuabe player in a season in which wasn't one of his best 8 in the league. how many players can you say that about?
Shep is offline   Reply With Quote