Message Board Basketball Forum - InsideHoops

Go Back   Message Board Basketball Forum - InsideHoops > InsideHoops Main Basketball Forums > NBA Forum

NBA Forum NBA Message Board - NBA Fan Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 07-04-2012, 12:35 AM   #91
Round Mound
NBA lottery pick
 
Round Mound's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 5,174
Round Mound has an incredible reputation hereRound Mound has an incredible reputation hereRound Mound has an incredible reputation hereRound Mound has an incredible reputation hereRound Mound has an incredible reputation hereRound Mound has an incredible reputation hereRound Mound has an incredible reputation hereRound Mound has an incredible reputation here
Default Re: Barkley: I'm better than Malone

Quote:
Originally Posted by joeyjoejoe
Malone was slightly better on offense and way better on d, has mote credentials 2nd points allstars all nba 1sts all d's mvp's, MALONE>>>> BARKLEY

To...The Idiot.

Slightly Better On Offense?

He Scored 1 More Bucket or 2 FTs Per Game More than Barkley on 46.3% FG. While Barkley Shot 51%. Play-Offs: An Area Where Malone ALWAYS DECLINED.

*Barkley Shot Almost 9% Better 2-Point FG in the Play-Offs ( Common Great SG 45% and a Great PF 54%)

2-Point FG: Post Game & Mid Range Game

Season:

Barkley shot 58.13% Two-Point FG at 21.6 PPG on 12.9...Two Point FGAs Pg

Malone shot 51.9% Tw-Point FG at 24.7 PPG on 17.5...Two-Point FGAs PG

Play-Offs: Where Malone ALWAYS DECLINED:

Barkley shot 55.13% FG at 22.5 PPG on 14.5 ...Two-Point FGAs PG

Malone shot 46.6% Two-Point FG at 24.6 PPG on 19.3...Two-Point FGAs PG

Better Offensive Player? What Are You On Cocaine? Acids? Mushrooms?

-Barkley Was the Better Offensive Player (Mid Range and Post): Play-Offs Especially
-Barkley Was the Better Rebounder
-Barkley Was the Better Passer and Creator
-Barkley Was Doubled More: "The Zone Buster"
-Barkley Was the More Skilled Player: Shooting, Dribbling, Fundamentals..etc
-Barkley Was the Better Shot Blocker: Avg 1.5 BPG at One Time
-Barkley Was the Better Stealer
-Barkley Was the Better Full Court Defender and Team Defender
-Higher ORT; Higher PER; Higher EFF, Higher +/-, Higher Shot Made/Missed Diferential...
etc


Only Thing Malone Was Better than Barkley is FT Shooting, Having Stockton and Post D: Which Wasn Great Either...He is No Garnett or Duncan.

Last edited by Round Mound : 07-04-2012 at 12:41 AM.
Round Mound is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-04-2012, 02:28 AM   #92
joeyjoejoe
Good High School Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 861
joeyjoejoe has an OK reputation so far
Default Re: Barkley: I'm better than Malone

So yes better on offense ever so slightly, way better on d, longevity and awards there ya go would ya look at that
joeyjoejoe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-04-2012, 02:58 PM   #93
Chalkmaze
Good college starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah
Posts: 3,072
Chalkmaze has decent reputationChalkmaze has decent reputation
Default Re: Barkley: I'm better than Malone

Chalkmaze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-04-2012, 03:00 PM   #94
Kiddlovesnets
NBA Superstar
 
Kiddlovesnets's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Nets 2nd round, Knick 37-45
Posts: 14,050
Kiddlovesnets has an incredible reputation hereKiddlovesnets has an incredible reputation hereKiddlovesnets has an incredible reputation hereKiddlovesnets has an incredible reputation hereKiddlovesnets has an incredible reputation hereKiddlovesnets has an incredible reputation hereKiddlovesnets has an incredible reputation here
Default Re: Barkley: I'm better than Malone

Its really difficult to compare this two though, the difference is by a hair.
Kiddlovesnets is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-04-2012, 03:54 PM   #95
Round Mound
NBA lottery pick
 
Round Mound's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 5,174
Round Mound has an incredible reputation hereRound Mound has an incredible reputation hereRound Mound has an incredible reputation hereRound Mound has an incredible reputation hereRound Mound has an incredible reputation hereRound Mound has an incredible reputation hereRound Mound has an incredible reputation hereRound Mound has an incredible reputation here
Default Re: Barkley: I'm better than Malone

Some People Just Can`t Handle the Evidence
Round Mound is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-04-2012, 04:03 PM   #96
BallsOut
NBA lottery pick
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 5,424
BallsOut has not been impressing people
Default Re: Barkley: I'm better than Malone

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kiddlovesnets
Its really difficult to compare this two though, the difference is by a hair.

Neither player has hair. Which makes it even more difficult
BallsOut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-04-2012, 04:36 PM   #97
Chalkmaze
Good college starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah
Posts: 3,072
Chalkmaze has decent reputationChalkmaze has decent reputation
Default Re: Barkley: I'm better than Malone

Quote:
Originally Posted by BallsOut
Neither player has hair. Which makes it even more difficult

In his prime, Karl's hair was clearly more fuller-bodied and stylish than sir premature baldness's.




Last edited by Chalkmaze : 07-04-2012 at 04:39 PM.
Chalkmaze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-04-2012, 07:36 PM   #98
ShaqAttack3234
7-time NBA All-Star
 
ShaqAttack3234's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 12,992
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
so the sixers were a better offensive team, so they should've won more games, but they ended up with a paltry 36 wins instead.

Defense was the problem. And it still would have been the problem if Stockton was on the Sixers.

Quote:
barkley would have been less effective on the offensive end with eaton clogging the paint and barkley would most likely get him traded because he was preventing him from scoring 25 points.

Barkley in his 2nd year averaged 20 with Moses Malone.

Quote:
yeh. but barkley and his ego would not fit on that roster, so no point putting him there.

How do you know? He played with a lot of talent in Phoenix, and Houston.

Quote:
excuses. how far a team goes will depend on their best player. championships matter, and people are judges by what they acheive. nobody cares about people who don't acheive, and excuses will not be made for why they did not acheive. you play the game to win.

Detroit weren't a team that relied on 1 or 2 stars every night to the extent later championship teams like the Bulls, Rockets and Lakers did.

Quote:
exactly. who knows. nobody knows, so they will be judged by what they achieved.

They should be judged on the level they played at, since their teams aren't remotely comparable.

Quote:
pretty damn good. which is why barkley was drafted to a team 1 season removed from a championship and he still didn't win. barkley then forced a trade to a team that made it to the conference semi finals and was expected to win it all..he didn't. he then forced another trade to a team 1 year removed from winning a championship and was expected to win it all..and you guessed it he still didn't. barkley was handed multiple rosters to win it all on a silver platter and he just could not get it done.

Yeah, he was drafted to one, didn't have that team in his prime, they fell apart quickly as players aged and retired or were traded.

He got to Phoenix in '93, and took them all the way to the finals.

The '94 and '95 Suns should have won, but age and injuries clearly took him down a little from his prime level.

Charles turned 34 before the '97 playoffs and was clearly past his prime.

Quote:
the pistons won only 4 more regular season games than the bulls, and they destroyed them 4-1 with the average winning margin of 15 points.

Because they were deep, not a 1 man team.

Quote:
the celtics still were heavily favoured and that supposed lack of bench did not restrict them in the regular season

I didn't read any predictions about the series so I don't know if they were favored, but I did watch all 6 games, and I don't remember it being referred to as an upset. And considering Detroit almost beat Boston the previous year, it wouldn't make that much sense.

Their bench may have not held them back in the regular season, but most agreed that it clearly had them tired. Boston was coming off of 3 consecutive deep playoff runs to the finals.

Boston didn't have one notable bench player. Detroit had Vinnie Johnson, Dennis Rodman, James Edwards and John Salley on their bench. Players who could start.

Quote:
agreed, lever is on a higher tier than barkley



Quote:
agreed, lever is on a much higher level to barkley. barkley would have clashed with alex english over who was taking the most shots every night, hence causing a trade and the nuggets languishing at the bottom of the league.

On that Denver team, there were plenty of shots to go around. They had kiki Vandeweghe and English both averaging 25-30 points on the same team a few years earlier.

Quote:
english has no case at all here. english was a nice scorer, a top 5 small forward, and not much else. lever was superb all-round, second team all-defense, and the second best shooting guard in the nba.

I don't think either player was all that great, so I don't care much to argue about one over the other.

Quote:
questionable or not, to even be anywhere close to a top 10 all time level player on the biggest stage of them all speaks volumes of his impact on that particular series.

Not really, Cedric Maxwell had a nice series, and the voters robbed Bird. Didn't make me overly impressed with Maxwell.

Quote:
karles lovely

Still don't really get it, or why you're calling Charles "Karles".

Quote:
or perhaps all motivation is lost. their star player just dissed the franchise and up and left for a team that was already in the conference semi finals without him.

And that has nothing to do with Barkley's ability as a basketball player.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shep
this is peak horace grant. the bulls had 3 good players, and grant was one of them. he helped the bulls to 67 wins, a 15-7 record in the playoffs, and a championship. in limited opportunities on offense he averaged 14.2ppg, led the bulls with 10.0rpg, 2.7apg, 1.2spg, 1.6bpg, and only 1.2topg, all on 58%fg. grant knew his role and he executed it perfectly.

Grant had limited opportunities on offense because his offense was pretty much limited to hitting open mid-range jumpers and finishing around the rim.

I appreciate what Grant did. He was a strong rebounder, a very good defender, a reliable mid-range shooter, a strong finisher, he ran the floor well, he was a smart player, and he was a good passer.

Pretty much an ideal complementary player, but you also don't want him to be more than your 3rd best player if you expect to contend. Top 15 players should at least be first or second option type players,

Quote:
all these players won games and participated in the playoffs. players are rewarded for winning games.

Because they had teams. Nance was the 3rd best player on the Cavs. How is winning as the 3rd best player comparable to being the best player?

Quote:
games missed does not come into play when ranking players in single seasons. despite it being his last season and him being 35 years old, bird's impact was still much greater than barkley's. the celtics went only 20-17 in those missed games anyway, and 31-14 with him.

I'm not going to tell you what your criteria should be, but I don't rank players who don't play at least 50 games between regular season and playoffs. But I'm not sure how you can compare what a player did in 45 games to what another did in 75.

Quote:
'94? his peak season's rank like this: '91, '92, '96, '97, '93/'98, '94.

Pretty much everyone including Pippen himself called '94 his best year. Led them to 55 wins without Jordan and a pretty limited cast. They went 51-21 with Pippen, and 44-16 with Pippen and Grant. Scottie added a 3 point shot, improved his scoring, stepped up his defense and rebounding, and took the Ewing/Riley Knicks to 7 who had challenged the Bulls even with Jordan the past 2 years. And even as a Knick fan, I can acknowledge that they got screwed on the Hue Hollins call.

Quote:
he improved on offense so much huh?

The Bulls won 67 games compared to 61 in '91. Pippen had more responsibility as the team's point forward, improved his outside shot noticeably and became a much more consistent player. Went from 17.8 ppg to 21 ppg while his shooting percentage only fell from 52% to 51%, but his free throw shooting went from 71% to 76% which makes up for that. His rebounding went up a little despite the Bulls becoming a better rebounding team. His assists went up from 6.2 per game to 7 per game, the most ever in the triangle offense, and the Bulls beat better competition in the playoffs. Pippen was a monster in the closeout games. 31/8/5 with 2 blocks on 12/23 shooting and 7/8 from the line to close out Miami. A triple double of 17/11/11 with 3 steals on 7/11 shooting to close out the Knicks in a game 7 no less. One of Pippen's class games to close out the Cavs in 6 with 29/12/5 with 4 steals and 4 blocks. Pippen was arguably the MVP of that series. And 26/5/4 on 9/17 shooting with 2 threes and 6/6 free throw shooting including the huge comeback to close out the Blazers in game 6. he was the second best player in the finals behind Michael Jordan.

Jordan guarded Magic in most of the '91 finals too. Pippen was only the primary defender on Magic in game 2 after Jordan got in foul trouble. And Pippen's '92 finals were better than '91.

And Pippen's '92 finals and playoffs were better than '91.

Quote:
robinson never had a contending team in his prime..infact he had the worst supporting cast of any of the top 10 players in the league every season.

Well, I'd call '93-'96 his prime, but he was already very good as a rookie and he had quite a bit of talent around him in Terry Cummings, who was as much of the 1st option as Robinson and led them in playoff scoring, Willie Anderson, Rod Strickland, and Sean Elliott. With that being said, that was one of the years I thought Robinson played well in the playoffs.

His '93 team wasn't bad either, though. But that was the other year I thought he played well in the playoffs.

His team in '95 was good. '96 team was the same minus Rodman, but Elliott and Johnson stepped up and had career years.

Quote:
i could say the same about barkley


You're right about that game 5, but he was only in his 3rd year. He played great in the '88 season. He was fine in '89, iirc, have to re-watch that series, but Cheeks did not outplay him. Agreed on '92, he had a subpar year. '95? He was 32 and injured in the Houston series. He was disappointing in the '90 series outside of the two 30/20 games, and they should have definitely won game 4.

Charles was a much better playoff performer and a more dominant player than Stockton, though, that's for sure.

Quote:
you have no point here

Of course I do, Stockton was never a top 5 player due to his inability to take over games. It's a reason why the Jazz didn't win a championship.
ShaqAttack3234 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-04-2012, 07:50 PM   #99
Round Mound
NBA lottery pick
 
Round Mound's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 5,174
Round Mound has an incredible reputation hereRound Mound has an incredible reputation hereRound Mound has an incredible reputation hereRound Mound has an incredible reputation hereRound Mound has an incredible reputation hereRound Mound has an incredible reputation hereRound Mound has an incredible reputation hereRound Mound has an incredible reputation here
Default Re: Barkley: I'm better than Malone

ShaqAttack3234

Shep is a Barkley Hater and Cockloving Jazz-Fan of Stockton-to-Malone
Shep brings in "Opinions" NOT FACTS or EVIDENCE...Save that For Me...

Its A Waste of Time To Discuss With Him...He Put`s Barkley as a Top 10-15 Player from 85 to 95 when he was clearly Top 2 and 3 after MJ and Late Hakeem from 87-95

Barkley on Bad Teams Shot 60% FG and 62-65% Two-Point FG on Over 23-24 PPG for 4-5 Years...That is While Doubled More than Any Other Player NOT NAMED SHAQ and Was the TOTAL FOCUS off the Offense on Bad Teams.

Barkley from 1985-86 to 1994-95 Was Better Than Malone In His Whole Stat Padding Career

OH, and Others Barkley Haters can`t Handle the Evidence I Put. They Just Hate to Remember how a 6`4 3/4 PF Just Took a Dump and Every Other PF and Let Them Know It Too.

Last edited by Round Mound : 07-05-2012 at 12:25 AM.
Round Mound is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-05-2012, 02:43 AM   #100
Shep
Decent college freshman
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,565
Shep is considered somewhat coolShep is considered somewhat coolShep is considered somewhat cool
Default Re: Barkley: I'm better than Malone

Quote:
Defense was the problem. And it still would have been the problem if Stockton was on the Sixers.
but stockton was much better than barkley, so that would have made them a more successful team as a result.
Quote:
Barkley in his 2nd year averaged 20 with Moses Malone.
yeh but barkley in his 2nd year was better than any other year besides '93
Quote:
How do you know? He played with a lot of talent in Phoenix, and Houston.
because this was barkley at his most selfish. he would refuse to play defense, be put on the bench because of this, and then most likely force a trade. i can see a similar drop off of production to that of mark aguirre's when he joined the pistons, except aguirre accepted his lesser role..barkley would not.
Quote:
Detroit weren't a team that relied on 1 or 2 stars every night to the extent later championship teams like the Bulls, Rockets and Lakers did.
isiah thomas was the only star on that roster, and they did rely on his production greatly.
Quote:
They should be judged on the level they played at, since their teams aren't remotely comparable.
nobody remembers losers for a reason
Quote:
Yeah, he was drafted to one, didn't have that team in his prime, they fell apart quickly as players aged and retired or were traded.
you don't regard a players second best year as part of his prime? they should have won a championship in 1985 barkley's rookie season. their team consisted of a top 2 center, a top 4 power forward, a top 2 small forward, and a top 5 point guard. how much more help could you possibly wish for? in '86 they still had a top 4 center, a top 2 power forward, and a top 4 point guard. they didn't go anywhere.
Quote:
He got to Phoenix in '93, and took them all the way to the finals.
well you would expect him to..considering they had been conference semifinalists the previous season.
Quote:
The '94 and '95 Suns should have won, but age and injuries clearly took him down a little from his prime level.

Quote:
Charles turned 34 before the '97 playoffs and was clearly past his prime.
he was still a top 2 power forward. houston also had a top 2 center, and a top 2 shooting guard.
Quote:
Because they were deep, not a 1 man team.
they were deep in the regular season too, and only won 4 more games.
Quote:
I didn't read any predictions about the series so I don't know if they were favored, but I did watch all 6 games, and I don't remember it being referred to as an upset. And considering Detroit almost beat Boston the previous year, it wouldn't make that much sense.
i would definately refer to it as an upset considering the celtics had home court advantage, the best record in the eastern conference, and had been to the nba finals every year since 1983 (4 consecutive years).
Quote:
Their bench may have not held them back in the regular season, but most agreed that it clearly had them tired. Boston was coming off of 3 consecutive deep playoff runs to the finals.
aww they were tired were they
Quote:
Boston didn't have one notable bench player. Detroit had Vinnie Johnson, Dennis Rodman, James Edwards and John Salley on their bench. Players who could start.
they made up for that with one of the best starting 5's in nba history.
Quote:
On that Denver team, there were plenty of shots to go around. They had kiki Vandeweghe and English both averaging 25-30 points on the same team a few years earlier.
that team was a much faster team than the '88 nuggets
Quote:
I don't think either player was all that great, so I don't care much to argue about one over the other.
lever was great. top 7 overall infact.
Quote:
Not really, Cedric Maxwell had a nice series, and the voters robbed Bird. Didn't make me overly impressed with Maxwell.
the difference here is that worthy stepped up just as much as magic throughout the playoffs, where as bird stepped up alot more than any other celtic in terms of the playoffs as a whole in 1981.
Quote:
Still don't really get it, or why you're calling Charles "Karles".
hybrid of kevin love and charles barkley since their games are similar
Quote:
And that has nothing to do with Barkley's ability as a basketball player.
but it has to do with barkley's legacy and what he meant to franchises
Quote:
Grant had limited opportunities on offense because his offense was pretty much limited to hitting open mid-range jumpers and finishing around the rim.

I appreciate what Grant did. He was a strong rebounder, a very good defender, a reliable mid-range shooter, a strong finisher, he ran the floor well, he was a smart player, and he was a good passer.

Pretty much an ideal complementary player, but you also don't want him to be more than your 3rd best player if you expect to contend. Top 15 players should at least be first or second option type players,
all players need to be on the same page if a team is expected to contend. grant perfected his role on offense and defense and was an integral part of a 67 win team that only lost 7 games on its way to a championship romp. once again winning plays a huge part in rankings, and no other player outside that top 14 could have done what grant did without disrupting chemistry and still had the same results.
Shep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-05-2012, 02:44 AM   #101
Shep
Decent college freshman
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,565
Shep is considered somewhat coolShep is considered somewhat coolShep is considered somewhat cool
Default Re: Barkley: I'm better than Malone

Quote:
Because they had teams. Nance was the 3rd best player on the Cavs. How is winning as the 3rd best player comparable to being the best player?
nance was actually the cavs best player
Quote:
I'm not going to tell you what your criteria should be, but I don't rank players who don't play at least 50 games between regular season and playoffs. But I'm not sure how you can compare what a player did in 45 games to what another did in 75.
thats fine..and cut off in rankings is different from player to player. if a player only plays 45 games and has minimal impact then i will not rank him, but if he has a major impact like larry bird did i will definately rank him accordingly.
Quote:
Pretty much everyone including Pippen himself called '94 his best year. Led them to 55 wins without Jordan and a pretty limited cast. They went 51-21 with Pippen, and 44-16 with Pippen and Grant. Scottie added a 3 point shot, improved his scoring, stepped up his defense and rebounding, and took the Ewing/Riley Knicks to 7 who had challenged the Bulls even with Jordan the past 2 years. And even as a Knick fan, I can acknowledge that they got screwed on the Hue Hollins call.
pippen also called lebron the greatest player of all time before he had won a championship.
bj armstrong stepped up and was an all-star in '94. horace grant had a career year in points, rebounds, and assists, and then they had toni kukoc come and and be one of the best 6th men in the entire league.
you expected pippen to put up more numbers with no mj around..but he had even less of an impact. they almost went .500 while pippen was injured so the roster wasn't even that bad. he also had minimal impact on the playoffs averaging almost 4 turnovers and 43%fg and then there was that decision to take himself out of the game in the final moments and sulk because a play wasn't run for him.
Quote:
The Bulls won 67 games compared to 61 in '91. Pippen had more responsibility as the team's point forward, improved his outside shot noticeably and became a much more consistent player. Went from 17.8 ppg to 21 ppg while his shooting percentage only fell from 52% to 51%, but his free throw shooting went from 71% to 76% which makes up for that. His rebounding went up a little despite the Bulls becoming a better rebounding team. His assists went up from 6.2 per game to 7 per game, the most ever in the triangle offense, and the Bulls beat better competition in the playoffs. Pippen was a monster in the closeout games. 31/8/5 with 2 blocks on 12/23 shooting and 7/8 from the line to close out Miami. A triple double of 17/11/11 with 3 steals on 7/11 shooting to close out the Knicks in a game 7 no less. One of Pippen's class games to close out the Cavs in 6 with 29/12/5 with 4 steals and 4 blocks. Pippen was arguably the MVP of that series. And 26/5/4 on 9/17 shooting with 2 threes and 6/6 free throw shooting including the huge comeback to close out the Blazers in game 6. he was the second best player in the finals behind Michael Jordan.

Jordan guarded Magic in most of the '91 finals too. Pippen was only the primary defender on Magic in game 2 after Jordan got in foul trouble. And Pippen's '92 finals were better than '91.

And Pippen's '92 finals and playoffs were better than '91.
'92 pippen was better in the regular season, but he was easily better in the playoffs in '91.

the knicks, 76ers, pistons, and lakers are much tougher than
the heat, knicks, cavs, and blazers

19.7ppg, 8.7rpg, 5.0apg, 3.3spg, 1.3bpg, 50%fg in a 3-0 sweep of the knicks

23.4ppg, 9.4rpg, 6.0apg, 1.6spg, 0.6bpg, 57%fg in a 4-1 win over the sixers

22.0ppg, 7.8rpg, 5.3apg, 3.0spg, 2.0bpg, 48%fg in a 4-0 sweep over the defending champion pistons

20.8ppg, 9.4rpg, 6.6apg, 2.4spg, 1.0bpg, in a 4-1 domination over the defending western conference champion lakers
Quote:
Well, I'd call '93-'96 his prime, but he was already very good as a rookie and he had quite a bit of talent around him in Terry Cummings, who was as much of the 1st option as Robinson and led them in playoff scoring, Willie Anderson, Rod Strickland, and Sean Elliott. With that being said, that was one of the years I thought Robinson played well in the playoffs.

His '93 team wasn't bad either, though. But that was the other year I thought he played well in the playoffs.

His team in '95 was good. '96 team was the same minus Rodman, but Elliott and Johnson stepped up and had career years.
avery johnson and sean elliott are d-leaguers without david robinson. johnson was cut by about 5 teams, and just look at what elliott did with the pistons when he was traded and how quickly he came crying back.
Quote:
Charles was a much better playoff performer and a more dominant player than Stockton, though, that's for sure
howcome barkley had teammates step up more than he did with regularity?
Quote:
Of course I do, Stockton was never a top 5 player due to his inability to take over games. It's a reason why the Jazz didn't win a championship.
stockton was a top 5 player in '88, and '91. the same amount of years barkley was a top 5 player.
Shep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-05-2012, 12:40 PM   #102
ShaqAttack3234
7-time NBA All-Star
 
ShaqAttack3234's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 12,992
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
but stockton was much better than barkley, so that would have made them a more successful team as a result.

The Sixers would get worse, and a point guard isn't changing a terrible defensive team to a good one.

Quote:
yeh but barkley in his 2nd year was better than any other year besides '93

How can you watch a game from '86 and see Barkley so raw without the same short/mid-range jumper, with more questionable decision making(hence the high turnovers), without as good ball-handling ability, or all of the same moves and determine that he was better in his 2nd year than he was in his prime? And none of the numbers back this up either.

Quote:
because this was barkley at his most selfish. he would refuse to play defense, be put on the bench because of this, and then most likely force a trade. i can see a similar drop off of production to that of mark aguirre's when he joined the pistons, except aguirre accepted his lesser role..barkley would not.

Where is this coming from? Barkley didn't seem selfish, and he got along well with Moses, and fine with Dr. J.

Detroit nearly won a title with Adrian Dantley, and he was more selfish than Barkley.

Quote:
isiah thomas was the only star on that roster, and they did rely on his production greatly.

They were among the teams that won and relied on a star the least due to their depth and balance. Dantley was a star too even though I think he's overrated.

Quote:
nobody remembers losers for a reason

People still remember great players even if they don't win a title.

Quote:
you don't regard a players second best year as part of his prime? they should have won a championship in 1985 barkley's rookie season. their team consisted of a top 2 center, a top 4 power forward, a top 2 small forward, and a top 5 point guard. how much more help could you possibly wish for? in '86 they still had a top 4 center, a top 2 power forward, and a top 4 point guard. they didn't go anywhere.

I do consider Barkley's 2nd best year his prime, of course, that year occurred sometime between '89-'93. I've rarely seen players who are in their prime in their 2nd season.

Barkley was a rookie in '85 averaging 14/9 in 29 mpg, I'm not going to judge a superstar based on what he did when he wasn't even an all-star.

I hold that against their best player Moses Malone.

Regarding '86, that top 4 center was out for the playoffs.

Quote:
well you would expect him to..considering they had been conference semifinalists the previous season.

Regardless, he had a great season and playoff run in Phoenix, plus KJ missed 33 games and he was limited compared to previous years.

Quote:
he was still a top 2 power forward. houston also had a top 2 center, and a top 2 shooting guard.

I thought Barkley played fine, and regardless of how good he was, he was a shell of his former self and old for basketball at 34.

Quote:
they were deep in the regular season too, and only won 4 more games.

The Bulls overachieved because Jordan had developed into arguably the best player in the league already, but they clearly didn't have the talent to win when it mattered.

Quote:
i would definately refer to it as an upset considering the celtics had home court advantage, the best record in the eastern conference, and had been to the nba finals every year since 1983 (4 consecutive years).

It's not hard to see Why Detroit beat them. Boston was a phenomenal offensive team, but not a great defensive team by that point. While Detroit was elite defensively, and they had more than enough weapons to be very good offensively. They were deeper and more well rounded by that point.

Quote:
they made up for that with one of the best starting 5's in nba history.

Detroit had a very formidable starting 5 themselves in addition to the great bench.

Quote:
that team was a much faster team than the '88 nuggets

The '84 Nuggets were significantly faster, but not only did they have Vandeweghe averaging over 29 and English averaging over 26, but there were still enough shots for Dan Issel to average almost 20.

Quote:
hybrid of kevin love and charles barkley since their games are similar

They aren't similar when you watch them, just compare their offensive ability.

Quote:
all players need to be on the same page if a team is expected to contend. grant perfected his role on offense and defense and was an integral part of a 67 win team that only lost 7 games on its way to a championship romp. once again winning plays a huge part in rankings, and no other player outside that top 14 could have done what grant did without disrupting chemistry and still had the same results.

Very solid complementary player as I said, but he wasn't a legitimate all-star, much less bordering on superstar level, which most players who are top 15 are.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shep
nance was actually the cavs best player

Nance was very good, but he wasn't as good as Daugherty or Price.

Quote:
bj armstrong stepped up and was an all-star in '94. horace grant had a career year in points, rebounds, and assists, and then they had toni kukoc come and and be one of the best 6th men in the entire league.

BJ did have a good season, but he was one of the most questionable all-stars I can think of. And that had to be one of, if not the weakest all-star teams in the East that year.

Grant did have a very good year, but I don't expect a team to contend like the Bulls did with Grant as their second best player and BJ Armstrong as the 3rd best player. Not unless you have an exceptionally deep team and 5-6 players at least close to that level, which the Bulls did not.

Pippen himself wasn't a big scorer, he was a good scorer, but limited in some regards. Good for 22 ppg, but Grant isn't a second option type player, and BJ was a good offensive player, but more of a shooter than anything. Kukoc was their second most talented offensive player, but he was often too 1 on 1 oriented for the triangle. They had a few decent role players after that.

I expect a team like that to make the playoffs, but even Phil Jackson only expected them to drop off by at least 15 games.

Quote:
you expected pippen to put up more numbers with no mj around..but he had even less of an impact. they almost went .500 while pippen was injured so the roster wasn't even that bad. he also had minimal impact on the playoffs averaging almost 4 turnovers and 43%fg and then there was that decision to take himself out of the game in the final moments and sulk because a play wasn't run for him.

4-6 is not good. Pippen raised his scoring while he also shot about the same percentage. In fact, his scoring average not only went up from 18.6 ppg to 22 ppg, but his shooting % went up from 47% to 49%, and that's while making almost 1 three per game, while he had never made a noticeable amount before then, so his eFG% was 51.5% compared to 48.2% in '93 and 51.1% in '92. It was higher at 52.9% in '91, but Pippen was scoring 4.2 extra ppg, Chicago's pace had slowed down so less transition opportunities for one of the best open court players, and there was no Michael Jordan around to receive most of the defensive attention anymore.

Quote:
'92 pippen was better in the regular season, but he was easily better in the playoffs in '91.

Nah he impressed me more in the '92 playoffs, only series he struggled in was the Knicks series, but he didn't face a defense like that in '91. Detroit was the closest. The 2 playoff runs were close, though. But Pippen not only had better season in '92, he was an improved player.

Quote:
the knicks, 76ers, pistons, and lakers are much tougher than
the heat, knicks, cavs, and blazers

Most of the series are debatable(though the Cavs and Blazers put up much tougher fights than the Pistons and Lakers(both had key injuries). But the '92 Knicks were much tougher than the '91 Sixers.

Quote:
avery johnson and sean elliott are d-leaguers without david robinson. johnson was cut by about 5 teams, and just look at what elliott did with the pistons when he was traded and how quickly he came crying back.

Avery Johnson knew how to run the offense, was a tough guard, and while he wasn't a scorer, he did make himself decent since he could penetrate and make those hook type shots, and had worked on his 15-18 foot jumper until he could knock them down when he was wide open(though Robinson had a part in getting him open looks). He ended up among the leaders in assists some years.

Elliott was a good outside shooter, he was productive when they iso'd him in the mid-post area, a good defender, and an athletic player with excellent size for his position who excelled in the open court. He was definitely a solid player, and he made 2 all-star teams.

He also had Dennis Rodman with those 2 guys on the '95 team. Dennis was the best rebounder in the league, and an excellent defender, though he sometimes slacked off by that point to get rebounds, particularly in the Houston series. Though he was still good enough to make the all-nba 3rd team despite missing 33 games, and the Spurs were on pace for 67 wins with him(40-9) and just a 55 win pace without him(22-11). Chuck Person was also an 11 ppg bench scorer in just 25 mpg and a dangerous shooter.

That's good support. The '93 team had Elliott in his first all-star year, Dale Ellis was still an elite shooter and another legit scoring threat on the perimeter. And they also had Antoine Carr who had averaged 20 ppg 2 years earlier when he got more minutes and was still giving them 13 in just 27 mpg. And they had some solid role players like Avery Johnson, Vinny Del Negro, Jr Reid ect.

Quote:
howcome barkley had teammates step up more than he did with regularity?

I don't agree that he did.
ShaqAttack3234 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-05-2012, 12:53 PM   #103
Poetry
High School Varsity 6th Man
 
Poetry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 797
Poetry is considered somewhat coolPoetry is considered somewhat cool
Default Re: Barkley: I'm better than Malone

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chalkmaze

I was rooting for the Jazz, but i still maintain former CBA player Matt Maloney cost the Rockets that series.
Poetry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2012, 05:27 AM   #104
Shep
Decent college freshman
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,565
Shep is considered somewhat coolShep is considered somewhat coolShep is considered somewhat cool
Default Re: Barkley: I'm better than Malone

Quote:
The Sixers would get worse, and a point guard isn't changing a terrible defensive team to a good one.
aquiring a better player for a worse one will definately benefit your team. lets say stockton was the sixers starting point guard and cheeks and barkley weren't there and someone of equal value of cheeks was in barkley's spot. jack sikma for example. that would make the sixers best 5:
C Mike Gminski (16.9ppg, 10.5rpg, 1.8apg, 0.8spg, 1.8bpg)
PF Jack Sikma (16.5ppg, 8.6rpg, 3.4apg, 1.1spg, 1.0bpg)
SF Cliff Robinson (19.0ppg, 6.5rpg, 2.1apg, 1.3spg, 0.6bpg)
SG Gerald Henderson/David Wingate
PG John Stockton (14.7ppg, 2.9rpg, 13.8apg, 3.0spg)

now tell me this team would not win any more than 36 games i could see them easily making atleast fifth seed and possibly making the conference semifinals.
Quote:
How can you watch a game from '86 and see Barkley so raw without the same short/mid-range jumper, with more questionable decision making(hence the high turnovers), without as good ball-handling ability, or all of the same moves and determine that he was better in his 2nd year than he was in his prime? And none of the numbers back this up either.
barkley was at his defensive peak in 1986. in the limited energy he had he was able to spread it over both ends of the court, unlike later on in his career when he began to rest on defense. he was the best player on a 54 win team that was eventually eliminated to the higher seed milwaukee bucks in 7 games. barkley, for once, played exceptionally well in the playoffs while the sixers were without their number 1 scorer and top 4 center in moses malone throughout the playoffs. barkley recorded what would be his highest averages in his playoff career for rebounds and assists. and ended up with averages of 25.0ppg, 15.8rpg, 5.6apg, 2.3spg, and 1.3bpg.
Quote:
Where is this coming from? Barkley didn't seem selfish, and he got along well with Moses, and fine with Dr. J.

Detroit nearly won a title with Adrian Dantley, and he was more selfish than Barkley.
ask scottie pippen. barkley not playing defense because he wanted to conserve energy for offense is selfish personified.
Quote:
They were among the teams that won and relied on a star the least due to their depth and balance. Dantley was a star too even though I think he's overrated.
if dantley was a star then there were about 70 stars in the nba at that point. in any case the difference between thomas and the rest of the pistons was obvious in terms of star power..about as obvious as it was between magic and the rest of the lakers.
Quote:
People still remember great players even if they don't win a title.
they will be alot easier to remember if they win games.
Quote:
I do consider Barkley's 2nd best year his prime, of course, that year occurred sometime between '89-'93. I've rarely seen players who are in their prime in their 2nd season.

Quote:
Barkley was a rookie in '85 averaging 14/9 in 29 mpg, I'm not going to judge a superstar based on what he did when he wasn't even an all-star.
in a team with that many people among the top at their position they should win regardless of rookies.
Quote:
I thought Barkley played fine, and regardless of how good he was, he was a shell of his former self and old for basketball at 34.
you are not old for basketball when you are top 2 in your position in the entire world. and his averages dipped from 19/14/5 and 48%fg to 18/12/3 and 43%
Quote:
The Bulls overachieved because Jordan had developed into arguably the best player in the league already, but they clearly didn't have the talent to win when it mattered.
because the isiah thomas led pistons made them look pedestrian
Quote:
It's not hard to see Why Detroit beat them. Boston was a phenomenal offensive team, but not a great defensive team by that point. While Detroit was elite defensively, and they had more than enough weapons to be very good offensively. They were deeper and more well rounded by that point.
detroid beat them because the isiah thomas led pistons made them look pedestrian
Quote:
Detroit had a very formidable starting 5 themselves in addition to the great bench
the celtics had the better starting 5 and the best record in the conference
Quote:
The '84 Nuggets were significantly faster, but not only did they have Vandeweghe averaging over 29 and English averaging over 26, but there were still enough shots for Dan Issel to average almost 20.
so yes, they were significantly faster
Quote:
They aren't similar when you watch them, just compare their offensive ability.
they both score and rebound well on pitiful teams.
Quote:
Very solid complementary player as I said, but he wasn't a legitimate all-star, much less bordering on superstar level, which most players who are top 15 are.
grant was definately bordering on superstar level in 1992. alot of these so called "superstars" would have to have their numbers drastically decrease to be able to fit in with chicago's schemes and not discrupt chemistry.
Quote:
Nance was very good, but he wasn't as good as Daugherty or Price.
nance was better in the regular season and playoffs than both daugherty and price.
Quote:
BJ did have a good season, but he was one of the most questionable all-stars I can think of. And that had to be one of, if not the weakest all-star teams in the East that year.
thats ok, he was still an all-star
Shep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-06-2012, 05:28 AM   #105
Shep
Decent college freshman
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,565
Shep is considered somewhat coolShep is considered somewhat coolShep is considered somewhat cool
Default Re: Barkley: I'm better than Malone

Quote:
Grant did have a very good year, but I don't expect a team to contend like the Bulls did with Grant as their second best player and BJ Armstrong as the 3rd best player. Not unless you have an exceptionally deep team and 5-6 players at least close to that level, which the Bulls did not.
you obviously underrated horace grant and bj armstrong then
Quote:
Pippen himself wasn't a big scorer, he was a good scorer, but limited in some regards. Good for 22 ppg, but Grant isn't a second option type player, and BJ was a good offensive player, but more of a shooter than anything. Kukoc was their second most talented offensive player, but he was often too 1 on 1 oriented for the triangle. They had a few decent role players after that.

I expect a team like that to make the playoffs, but even Phil Jackson only expected them to drop off by at least 15 games.
it was very fortunate that grant could sustain his play from the previous season, bj could show that massive improvement, and they could add a talented youngster such as kukoc along with nice role players such as longley and myers.
Quote:
4-6 is not good
the losses were all against powerful outfits, only 1 came against a sub .500 team and that was on the road.
Quote:
Pippen raised his scoring while he also shot about the same percentage. In fact, his scoring average not only went up from 18.6 ppg to 22 ppg, but his shooting % went up from 47% to 49%, and that's while making almost 1 three per game, while he had never made a noticeable amount before then, so his eFG% was 51.5% compared to 48.2% in '93 and 51.1% in '92. It was higher at 52.9% in '91, but Pippen was scoring 4.2 extra ppg, Chicago's pace had slowed down so less transition opportunities for one of the best open court players, and there was no Michael Jordan around to receive most of the defensive attention anymore.
c'mon the greatest scorer in nba history up and leaves and the best you can do is average 3 more points? as the second best player on the team he definately should have stepped up and scored atleast 25ppg on that roster that was so desperate for offense.
Quote:
Nah he impressed me more in the '92 playoffs, only series he struggled in was the Knicks series, but he didn't face a defense like that in '91. Detroit was the closest. The 2 playoff runs were close, though. But Pippen not only had better season in '92, he was an improved player.
the bulls not only were alot more dominant in '91, they also faced tougher competition, and pippen was more productive. pippen also got better as the bulls progressed throughout, and asserted himself alot more.
Quote:
Most of the series are debatable(though the Cavs and Blazers put up much tougher fights than the Pistons and Lakers(both had key injuries). But the '92 Knicks were much tougher than the '91 Sixers.
they only put up tougher fights because the bulls were less dominant, jordan wasn't as good, and pippen wasn't as good.
Quote:
Avery Johnson knew how to run the offense, was a tough guard, and while he wasn't a scorer, he did make himself decent since he could penetrate and make those hook type shots, and had worked on his 15-18 foot jumper until he could knock them down when he was wide open(though Robinson had a part in getting him open looks). He ended up among the leaders in assists some years.
robinson made johnson. johnson was a journeyman until he ended up in san antonio. nobody wanted him. even the spurs didn't want him. they let him walk to the golden state warriors in 1993, then he came crying back in 1994 once he realised he sucked, and he would never see another nba paycheck if he didn't jump on robinson's coattails again.
Quote:
Elliott was a good outside shooter, he was productive when they iso'd him in the mid-post area, a good defender, and an athletic player with excellent size for his position who excelled in the open court. He was definitely a solid player, and he made 2 all-star teams.
elliott was more of the same. absolute filth without robinson. he was so valuable to san antonio that they traded him for a guy that never played a game for the spurs all you gotta do is look what sort of player he was in 1994 with no robinson in that 1 year with the pistons to realise that he was trash.
Quote:
He also had Dennis Rodman with those 2 guys on the '95 team. Dennis was the best rebounder in the league, and an excellent defender, though he sometimes slacked off by that point to get rebounds, particularly in the Houston series. Though he was still good enough to make the all-nba 3rd team despite missing 33 games, and the Spurs were on pace for 67 wins with him(40-9) and just a 55 win pace without him(22-11). Chuck Person was also an 11 ppg bench scorer in just 25 mpg and a dangerous shooter.
oh yeh..another valuable piece..so valuable infact that they traded him for freakin will perdue in the offseason and only lost 3 more games. will freakin perdue.
Quote:
That's good support
destroyed
Quote:
The '93 team had Elliott in his first all-star year, Dale Ellis was still an elite shooter and another legit scoring threat on the perimeter. And they also had Antoine Carr who had averaged 20 ppg 2 years earlier when he got more minutes and was still giving them 13 in just 27 mpg. And they had some solid role players like Avery Johnson, Vinny Del Negro, Jr Reid ect.
antoine carr and his 5.5 rebounds per game in 27 minutes was pretty good ellis is a one dimentional shooter..and the other guys are d-leaguers.
Quote:
I don't agree that he did.
lol ok
Shep is offline   Reply With Quote
This NBA Basketball News Website Sponsored by:
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:22 PM.




NBA Basketball Forum Key Links:
InsideHoops Home
NBA Rumors
Basketball Blog
NBA Daily Recaps
NBA Videos
Fantasy Basketball
NBA Mock Draft
NBA Free Agents
All-Star Weekend
---
High School Basketball
Streetball
---
InsideHoops Twitter
Search Our Site















Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. Terms of Use/Service | Privacy Policy