View Single Post
Old 06-28-2012, 05:13 AM   #38
7-time NBA All-Star
ShaqAttack3234's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 12,753
Default Re: Barkley: I'm better than Malone

Originally Posted by StateOfMind12
It's a combination of both to be honest. I think Barkley coasting through the regular season definitely gave him extra energy and stamina to play in the playoffs and his game was a pretty good fit for the post-season as well.

I don't necessarily disagree, but even in a season like '93 after playing for the Dream Team(which seemed to take it's toll on other players such as Pippen, Drexler and even MJ), and then a regular season where he was motivated and busted his ass after a subpar '92 season when he was lazy and unhappy, he dominated in the postseason in '93. Several of his games in that run are among the best I've seen him play such as games 2 and 5 vs the Spurs and games 5 and 7 vs Seattle.

But what seasons did you think Barkley coasted in from '88-'93 except for '92 when he didn't make the playoffs?

In Charles '90 season, which many consider his best, I wouldn't say he broke down in the playoffs. He had three 30/20 games in 10 playoff games, though I will say that he had an uneven series vs Chicago and should've capitalized on game 4 when Pippen was out attending his father's funeral and Philly had a chance to tie the series at home. The Sixers had comparable talent to the Bulls in general, much less without Pippen. Then again, Jordan at his peak playing perfect basketball made it difficult. They gave him the outside shot, and MJ burned him all series long, mostly on jumpers, but exploited his size advantage on Hawkins in the post when he felt like it as well. But Charles should've played better and some of his struggles can be attributed to his poor free throw shooting that series.

Barkley had a fair amount of chokes himself though which is why I don't understand everybody constantly highlighting Malone's chokes but then completely ignoring Barkley's.

In his prime? Not really, and compare his postseason play to Malone's. It's obvious to me that they aren't comparable in that regard.

Just to cite a few examples of Barkley's post-season chokes

Can't argue with the Houston series, and Phoenix did have more talent than Houston, imo. Phoenix did have their interior defense exposed big time by Hakeem and Thorpe in the '94 season, though. That was their biggest weakness, and one of the negatives of having Barkley at power forward.

But Barkley was already looking like not quite the player he had been in that '94 series, and Barkley was talking about retiring after '94 because of his back.

And I'll never forget the image of Barkley hobbling around in game 7.

Those are choke jobs, partially by the whole Suns team....except KJ who was fantastic in both series, but at least this wasn't prime '88-'93 Barkley.

Originally Posted by Shep
actually he was 9th.

Barkley was never as low as 9th any season from '87 through '95.

behind jordan


scottie pippen

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.


Correct, he was number 2 as I mentioned.

david robinson

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.

john stockton

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.

hakeem olajuwon

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.

karl malone

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.

clyde drexler.

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.

although i'll admit barkley had slightly the better playoff, malone had a much better regular season, and this is the difference here.

Nah, Barkley had the better regular season too.

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

Barkley's team won 44 games because they were weak, they went just 5-10 without him. 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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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

yeh barkley was better than malone most years of his prime because malone hadn't entered his yet.

Fair point. Malone's prime started unusually late, and he may be the only all-time great to peak as late as 34 years old.

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.

No arguments here, we're on the same page.

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?

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.

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.

And I thought about it, and I agree that Malone's '99 season wasn't even one of his top 8.
ShaqAttack3234 is offline   Reply With Quote