View Single Post
Old 07-29-2012, 12:27 AM   #152
ShaqAttack3234
7-time NBA All-Star
 
ShaqAttack3234's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 12,951
ShaqAttack3234 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableShaqAttack3234 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableShaqAttack3234 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableShaqAttack3234 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableShaqAttack3234 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableShaqAttack3234 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableShaqAttack3234 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableShaqAttack3234 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableShaqAttack3234 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableShaqAttack3234 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginableShaqAttack3234 is the Michael Jordan of posters with the best reputation imaginable
Default Re: Barkley: I'm better than Malone

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shep
and why are you mentioning only 1 series? overall he averaged 14.8ppg, 2.9apg, 13.6apg, and 2.1spg. including a masterful 16.0ppg, 3.6rpg, 16.0apg, 2.0spg series against the la clippers, and 14.2ppg, 3.2rpg, 14.0apg, 3.2spg series against gary payton and the seattle supersonics.

1 series? It's the series that prevented them from getting to the finals. Due to Malone having one of the best series of his career, they had a chance to upset the favored and more talent Blazers, if Stockton had played close to his usual level, but he didn't. And to make matters worse, Porter completely outplayed him, despite not being as good of a player as Stockton in general. I expect much more from a top 10 player in the game.

His seattle series was nothing special, imo, and you forgot to add that he shot 43% in it. Utah won that series primarily because of Karl Malone's dominance and Jeff Malone's 22 ppg on 54% didn't hurt either. The 2 Malones averaged about 52 ppg between them.

Even for the entire run, Stockton's scoring average dropped 1 ppg from the season and assists were about the same, but his shooting % dropped from 48% to 42%, so his overall playoff numbers were worse, but that's not all you have to look at.

Quote:
again, 1 series. the jazz made the conference finals again, 1 out of only 4 teams to do so, and lost to the eventual champion, and much stronger houston rockets.

they shouldn't have even been in the wcf in the first place, but they destroyed the powerful san antonio spurs in 4 games in the first round without home court advantage, then defeated the team that just got done beating the team with the best record in the nba, all while jeff hornacek was still getting used to his new surroundings.

The Jazz made the conference finals, but once again, Stockton coming up small prevented them from making that series more competitive. Granted, Malone didn't have the best series either(he had food poisoning, iirc), but Malone's improved all around game was the main reason Utah had as much success as they did.

Even for the entire playoffs, Stockton's scoring dropped a bit, assists dropped from nearly 13 per game to not even 10, and his shooting % dropped from almost 53% in the season to a little under 46%.

This, much like '92 qualifies as a playoff failure under my definition, which is losing while playing noticeably below your usual level.

The main reason they beat the Spurs was because Karl Malone shut down David Robinson. The Spurs had a pretty good team around Robinson, but most of them played poorly in the series too.

And that's not some incredible team on paper. Plus they had a joke of a head coach in John Lucas. They overachieved to get 55 wins primarily because David Robinson was a dominant regular season player

Quote:
one series and another wcf appearance 1 of only 4 teams to do so defeated the san antonio spurs again without homecourt advantage.

stockton didn't have a particularily good wcf, but a main reason behind that was due to him being matched up with the best point guard in the nba, and also one of the best defenders in the league. stockton was only a top 3 point guard by this stage. but lets have a look at what he did in the first 2 rounds:

against portland: 14.2ppg, 2.4rpg, 14.4apg, 1.8spg
against san antonio: 9.8ppg, 4.3rpg, 11.7apg, 1.3spg (no homecourt advantage)

Malone was easily Utah's best player and the MVP of the Spurs series. He once again shut down Robinson, and much like the '94 series, most of Robinson's teammates followed his lead and played like shit.

I covered his terrible WCF which alone makes it a failure, but even for the entire playoffs, Stockton's scoring dropped almost 4 ppg,his assists dropped and his FG% plummeted from almost 54% to under 46%.

By the way, Penny was the best PG.

Quote:
beside points and blocks, barkley decreased in every way. his assists and steals were more than halved, and his rebounding was decreased by 2 per game, along with the drop in field goal percent.

I don't care about his steals numbers decreasing in the last and a small drop in FG% is normal from the regular season to the playoffs.

Quote:
the main reason they had a chance to beat a superior opponent was because the players around barkley stepped up more.

The main reason they had a chance to beat a superior opponent is because Barkley's level of play was high in general with the only blemishes being his missed FT in game 3 and the elimination game.

Quote:
they got swept in the first round. barkley, again, was nowhere near where the sixers needed him to be

Nowhere near the player they needed him to be? You see how close each game was? Barkley playing like a superstar and elite player is why they had a chance to win all 3 games vs a better team.

Quote:
still a top 2 power forward and one of the best 12 players on the planet.

Even if that was true(which it's not), that would only show how remarkable of a player Barkley was in his prime to decline so much and still be that good. But '97 Barkley is nowhere near representative of how good Barkley was during his prime, so it's simply not really a factor for me when ranking him.

Quote:
thats funny, considering i have rose over kidd in that argument. gary payton was the best point guard in '99, '00, and '01.

it was close between Kidd and Payton all 3 years, so I don't have a problem with you taking Payton.

Quote:
it was kidd from '02-'04, and '07.

at '07. Nash was by far the best PG and a top 3 player in the entire league behind only Kobe and Duncan. Kidd probably had his best season since '04 and was a top 4 PG behind Nash, Arenas and Baron.

Quote:
pierce wasn't even top 2 on the celtics roster. no way pierce wins finals mvp with his 18/5/3 on 44%fg, especially when rondo is getting 14/6/8/2, including a nice 19/12/10/2 triple double in their game 2 win. kg also probably outplayed pierce in the finals.

It's tough to compare these 3 players impact considering how different they were. None of these 3 really had a standout series in the finals.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shep
kidd was alot closer to nowitzki as the mavs best player than any other player was to kidd himself

There is no sort of argument that can be made to support this.

Quote:
barkley's highest mvp rank was top 3 once, in 1993. stockton's highest mvp rank was top 3 in 3 years: 1989, 1991, and 1992.

Barkley was voted MVP in '93, finished 2nd in '90 and would have finished 1st had it not been for several voters leaving him off his ballot. I would have gone with Hakeem in '93 and Jordan in '90, though.

Stockton's highest MVP finish was 7th in '89, he never even had the most MVP votes on his own team.

Quote:
a top 2 center, and top 5 overall player wasn't enough , throw in a top 2 shooting guard? still not enough


As I said, I don't really care what '97 Barkley did.

Quote:
he was much more effective in 1982 in his youth. he only added those things because he was getting old and losing his physical abilities.

he wasn't more effective with such a limited half court skill set. He added an outside shot because it's a basic thing for a perimeter player to have, and he added a post game to became a truly great half court player and take his game to the next level. He couldn't have made the transition to 1st option in '87 and succeeded had he not added to his game.

He didn't add those things when he got old. He started adding the outside shot around '84-'85 when he was only about 24-25 and not even in his prime. He added the post game in '87 when he was only 27, an age when most players are in or near their peaks, and still have several prime years left.

Quote:
larry bird and magic johnson were the best 2 players from the regular season after leading their respective teams to the best 2 records in the nba. moses malone dropped from 3rd in the regular season to 5th after the playoffs due to his poor individual, and team showing in the post season. the houston rockets bowed out in the first round, winning only 1 game, and the losing margin being 15, and 21 points in the losses. moses dropped 7 points, and dropped 9 percentage points off his field goals, he also did not manage to block a shot per game, in fact he averaged 3 times more turnovers than blocks for the series.

Nobody did anything comparable to Moses in the regular season that year. I liked other player's skill sets better such as Kareem, Bird and possibly Dr. J, but I can't argue with Malone's dominance.

I'm aware of his disappointing playoff series, but Malone ended up such a clear number 1 for the regular season, especially when nobody else really had an outstanding year by best player standards that the playoff disappointment is nowhere near enough to drop him below his number 1 spot. Particularly in a 3 game mini-series, which was an idiotic format. talk about a small sample size.

Quote:
i'm sorry, what does this quote prove?

It's Magic talking about the Lakers becoming his team in '87 at Pat Riley's request after having been Kareem's team for all of the years before.

You said Magic and Riley would agree with you, I proved you wrong.

Quote:
but the ball was in his hands alot more, or there was the opportunity to be in his hands, so there was more than ample opportunity to step up his scoring.

Actually, it wasn't. Pippen didn't become any more ball-dominant after '92. In fact, he may have been less since running the offense and facilitating was split up more. The Bulls also relied on executing the triangle offense even more with less talent in '94 which also prevented ball-dominance.
ShaqAttack3234 is offline   Reply With Quote