View Single Post
Old 07-24-2012, 03:07 PM   #147
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 Shep
lol out of those playoffs stockton stepped up his game in 1992, 1994, and 1996 leaving only 1990, 1993, and 1995 as the only seasons where he didn't step up.

'92? Stockton managed just 14.3 ppg and 11.2 apg on a terrible 39.7% compared to a 15.8 ppg, 13.7 apg, 48.2% season. Stockton's numbers are lowered by him being forced to leave sit out the second half of game 5. But in the elimination game, Stockton had 18 points and 12 assists, but on 5/19 shooting and 1/8 on 3s with 5 turnovers.

Stockton was extremely quiet in the '94 WCF. He fell from 15.2 ppg and 12.6 apg on 52.8% in the season to 14.4 ppg and 9.4 apg on 41.5% including quiet games of 17 points/6 assists in a key game 5 that pretty much decided if Utah would make it a series, and an elimination game of 13 points and 9 assists on 6/19 shooting.

In the '96 WCF, Stockton dropped to 9.9 ppg and 7.6 apg on 39.7% compared to his season averages of 14.7 ppg and 11.2 apg on 53.8%.


The Sixers lost in game 1, but Barkley with a sprained ankle had 21 points, 13 rebounds and 6 blocks on 8/15 shooting including the steal and basket to tie the game at 104 with 1:10 remaining.

Barkley led the Sixers with 26 points, 15 rebounds and 3 assists on 9/15 shooting an OT game 2 win. He was the hero in OT with 8 points including a key steal and basket to give the Sixers a 121-120 lead, and then the gamewinner with 11 seconds left.

In game 3, Barkley had 39 points to go along with 9 rebounds on 13/19 shooting and 13/14 from the line, though he did miss a key free throw.

In game 4, Barkley had 25 points, 13 rebounds and 4 assists on 8/10 shooting including 12 points in the 4th quarter.

Though he did have just 12 points and 13 rebounds and 5/19 shooting in game 5. Regardless, it was much better than those Stockton series, and Charles was just a 3rd year player and his play through 4 games was a reason they had a chance to beat a superior opponent.


In game 1, he didn't dominate thanks to Oakley's physical defense and Knick double teams, but he did still have 22 points, 12 rebounds and 6 assists on 7/12 shooting.

In game 2, Barkley had 30 points, 12 rebounds and 7 assists on 10/17 shooting and 10/11 from the line, though the Knicks did make a comeback, and won by 1 point on a 3 by Trent Tucker.

In game 3, Barkley had 29 points, 11 rebounds and 3 assists on 12/16 shooting, but they lost by 1 in OT on a gamewinner by Gerald Wilkins with 6 seconds remaining.

They had a chance to win the series, but Barkley's play was a reason they competed with a superior team in all 3 games that were decided late in the games.

1996 (destroyed by david robinson and the san antonio spurs in the first round)

I'd agree more with criticizing Barkley's play in '94 and '95 because he at least had contending teams and was closer to his prime, despite dealing with injuries.

1997 (almost outplayed by clyde drexler)

Barkley played fine, that said, he was 34 by this time with bad knees and a bad back. No longer a dominant force and no longer the franchise player on his team so I didn't really care what he did.

1998 (teams most disappointing player, almost outplayed by matt maloney)

He was done by this point.

1999 (dominated in the first round after winning 62% of all regular season games)

Barkley stepped up a lot.

well you do put a huge emphasis on rating scoring point guards over traditional all-round point guards who are better

Not really, I chose '02 Kidd in a recent thread over '11 Derrick Rose. In fact, Kidd was the best PG in the league from '99-'04 with the exception of '00.

rondo is 5th in 2010 and kidd is 9th in 2011. nothing wrong with these rankings. rondo is the celtics best player in the regular season and playoffs, including a magic johnson like series against the cleveland cavaliers where he averaged 21/6/12/2 on 54%fg. the celtics make it to game 7 of the nba finals.

Rondo was a fine player, and he was the standout player of the Cavs series, but Pierce was probably still the man on that team, and the standout player of the ECF vs Orlando, and would have probably been finals MVP had Boston won. Rondo only really stood out in the ECSF.

Top 5 players are at a different level. The Celtics won because of the strength of their whole team, which was 8 deep with quality players, and their team defense.

kidd, while old, still was the mavericks second best player in the regular season and playoffs. while not having mind blowing numbers, kidd showed leadership, and steady play in dallas's quest to become 2011 nba champions. its not all about stats.

I appreciate what Kidd did for that team with his passing, defense vs bigger players and basketball IQ, as well as his improved 3 point shot, but he was more like a role player by that point. Terry's scoring and clutch play and Chandler's defense and rebounding made them better. Arguably Marion as well.

stockton was easily more mvp caliber than barkley

He never once got serious MVP consideration.

stockton stepped up his game in the playoffs on numerous occasions, such as 1988, 1992, 1994, 1996, 1997, 1998, 2001 (38 years old), 2002 (39 years old).

Already proved you wrong on '92, '94 and '96, which are what I care about more considering they're either Stockton's prime, or pretty close to it. He did finally step up big in '97. And generally did well in a reduced role as he got older, he impressed me in 2000 for example(at least vs Seattle), but the expectations were much lower by this point.

barkley obviously could not get it done with star players arounds him

He did pretty well with even a limited Kevin Johnson in '93.

hakeem olajuwon wasn't good enough?

He was 34 and a shell of his former self, Hakeem declined greatly after that 1 year too. Stockton had Malone for their entire primes.

how many wins did these things get drexler

I don't really care. If you're the better scorer, rebounder, passer and shooter, you're clearly the better passer.

so barkley is in his prime when he is missing playoff's over deep playoff runs averaging 25/16/6 and 58% magic isn't even in his prime winning finals mvp's

The supporting cast matters too.

When Magic has at least as much passing ability as he ever did from '87-'90, a bigger role to produce more as a playmaker, the new found ability to take over a game in a half court situation with his great post game and reliable outside shot, which also made his playmaking even better since the Lakers could run the offense through Magic in the post, it's obvious that he took his game to another level. Those major differences are why that period is Magic's prime.

magic was the best, meanwhile moses was all the way down at the 5 position. moses had a good regular season, and by the end of it was ahead of the likes of erving, and abdul-jabber, but still behind bird, and johnson.

Moses was the dominant player of the regular season by far, it's not particularly close, this is why despite his disappointing playoff performance(which I've discussed in detail before), is not enough to drop him from his spot as the best player in the '82 season.

i talk to both with great regularity. we all share the same opinion.

This quote from Magic proves he does not agree. It also mentions Riley, but I can find the video of him saying it directly later.

so 5 in 60 years?

I wasn't going back before the Celtic dynasty since I'm not particularly knowledgeable about that era, nor do I care as much. Although I am aware of the Laker dynasty led by Mikan as well as championship teams led by Dolph Schayes as well as Paul Arizin/Neil Johnston.

All this proves is that the value of point guards is overrated which I suspected due to the ball-dominant nature of the position.

the bulls went from averaging 105ppg to 98ppg in 1994, it would have definately made him and the bulls more effective had he picked up the scoring slack.

Ultimately he did help the Bulls basically match their win total, despite being far less talented with the loss of the greatest player ever, imo. You expect a massive decline after that.

Despite that, Pippen did pick up some of the scoring slack increasing his scoring 3.4 ppg, while he also shot the ball much more efficiently and also stepped up his defense and rebounding. That's even more impressive because he was now the focus of opposing defenses with Jordan not around anymore.

it can definately determine that. we learn how players react to different situations, situations that could have them fishing the next day. with these things in mind we realise what kind of player he really is and is ranked according to these findings.

I do take into consideration when player's games don't translate as well to the postseason, although I usually have an idea of this based on their skill set in general. For example, Karl Malone often benefited from easy baskets, so his offense usually fell off. David Robinson lacked a good back to the basket game and go to move so his offense usually fell off greatly. Lebron was a poor shooter in '07 and '08 and this got exposed each year. Durant's '10 regular season scoring was partially a result of an excessive amount of FTA, which he wasn't getting in the playoffs, hence his decline.

But there's also just bad match ups/slumps that occur, which can still decide a ranking for me when it's close, but won't make a big difference.
ShaqAttack3234 is offline   Reply With Quote