[quote]MattyXL wrote:
Fuck Barkley, he’s a dipshit
http://www.complex.com/sports/2012/08/charles-oakley-will-hate-charles-barkley-forever[/quote]
Seems like Oakley’s the dipshit in all this. Taking a shot at a guy 'cause you know it’ll get broken up before anything happens is a hoe move.
[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
[quote]MattyXL wrote:
Fuck Barkley, he’s a dipshit
http://www.complex.com/sports/2012/08/charles-oakley-will-hate-charles-barkley-forever[/quote]
Seems like Oakley’s the dipshit in all this. Taking a shit at a guy 'cause you know it’ll get broken up before anything happens is a hoe move.[/quote]
Looks to me that’s how all on court fights are and Oakley has gone after guys off the court including Barkley. Barkley is perpetrator of hoe like moves.
[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
[quote]tsantos wrote:
Still, Sir Charles for a short fat-ass having to go up against monsters was a very good player (and funny as hell) [/quote]
Barkley was an athletic freak of nature and one of the top 3 power forwards of all time. Calling him a “short fatass” and “very good” is a complete disservice to his place in the game.[/quote]
Kevin Garnett, Dirk Nowitzki, Tim Duncan. Just to name a few PF’s still playing who are better than Barkley was. I love Barkley and all, but top 3 of all time? That’s a reach.
[quote]flipcollar wrote:
[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
[quote]tsantos wrote:
Still, Sir Charles for a short fat-ass having to go up against monsters was a very good player (and funny as hell) [/quote]
Barkley was an athletic freak of nature and one of the top 3 power forwards of all time. Calling him a “short fatass” and “very good” is a complete disservice to his place in the game.[/quote]
Kevin Garnett, Dirk Nowitzki, Tim Duncan. Just to name a few PF’s still playing who are better than Barkley was. I love Barkley and all, but top 3 of all time? That’s a reach.[/quote]
I would take Karl Malone, Larry Bird, and Shawn Kemp over Barkley also.
[quote]flipcollar wrote:
[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
[quote]tsantos wrote:
Still, Sir Charles for a short fat-ass having to go up against monsters was a very good player (and funny as hell) [/quote]
Barkley was an athletic freak of nature and one of the top 3 power forwards of all time. Calling him a “short fatass” and “very good” is a complete disservice to his place in the game.[/quote]
Kevin Garnett, Dirk Nowitzki, Tim Duncan. Just to name a few PF’s still playing who are better than Barkley was. I love Barkley and all, but top 3 of all time? That’s a reach.[/quote]
Interesting debate. I care way too much about things like legacies and all-time player rankings, so…
Bill Simmons’ basketball book (released in 2009) had Barkley ranked the 19th-best player of all time, just ahead of Garnett (22nd) and just behind Karl Malone (17th), Bob Pettit (older guy from the 50’s and 60’s), and Tim Duncan (7th). I think those were the only PF’s ahead of Barkley, unless you count Elgin Baylor (15th) as a PF.
(A general note on Simmons’ rankings: they weren’t meant to be interpreted so literally, since he included a few guys like Robert Horry and Arvydas Sabonis more for legacy and/or memorability reasons than a literal ranking would have - but at the top he was pretty serious)
Dirk was something like 37th in the book, but Simmons has acknowledged that he would be higher if he was redoing the rankings today (especially after anchoring the 2010 championship team).
I don’t know that you can properly compare guys from the 50’s and 60’s to today, so I’ll pass on evaluating Barkley against Pettit and Baylor.
Duncan and Malone are definitely ahead of Barkley. So it’s probably a race for third place.
Garnett and Nowitzki are probably the only other guys in this conversation (seriously, besides the guys named here, look through NBA history and give me another PF that belongs in the conversation with Barkley). How you feel about Barkley vs. Nowitzki vs. Garnett probably depends on how much you value defense (Garnett is by far the best), titles (Dirk and Garnett both have one, Barkley zero, although Barkley’s apex came at Jordan’s apex and nobody beat Jordan in a Finals from 91-98, exlcuding the baseball years), and certain individual strengths (for example, Barkley is by far the best offensive rebounder of the three; Dirk is the most complete offensive player of the three; Garnett is the best defender of the three).
From 1986 through 1996, Chuck averaged 23-plus points and 11-plus rebounds every season and made the All-Star team every year. The best 10-year stretches by Garnett and Nowitzki are extremely similar to that, so numbers won’t easily resolve this.
I think Chuck’s goofy media personality today obscures what a dominant force he really was in his prime. In-his-prime Barkley was absolutely TERRIFYING on a fast break.
[quote]mbdix wrote:
[quote]flipcollar wrote:
[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
[quote]tsantos wrote:
Still, Sir Charles for a short fat-ass having to go up against monsters was a very good player (and funny as hell) [/quote]
Barkley was an athletic freak of nature and one of the top 3 power forwards of all time. Calling him a “short fatass” and “very good” is a complete disservice to his place in the game.[/quote]
Kevin Garnett, Dirk Nowitzki, Tim Duncan. Just to name a few PF’s still playing who are better than Barkley was. I love Barkley and all, but top 3 of all time? That’s a reach.[/quote]
I would take Karl Malone, Larry Bird, and Shawn Kemp over Barkley also. [/quote]
Bird was a small forward and Kemp had five good seasons. Barkley shits on everyone not named Duncan or Malone, and it can be argued that his individual numbers are superior to both. People forget just how good Barkley really was.
[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
[quote]mbdix wrote:
[quote]flipcollar wrote:
[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
[quote]tsantos wrote:
Still, Sir Charles for a short fat-ass having to go up against monsters was a very good player (and funny as hell) [/quote]
Barkley was an athletic freak of nature and one of the top 3 power forwards of all time. Calling him a “short fatass” and “very good” is a complete disservice to his place in the game.[/quote]
Kevin Garnett, Dirk Nowitzki, Tim Duncan. Just to name a few PF’s still playing who are better than Barkley was. I love Barkley and all, but top 3 of all time? That’s a reach.[/quote]
I would take Karl Malone, Larry Bird, and Shawn Kemp over Barkley also. [/quote]
Bird was a small forward and Kemp had five good seasons. Barkley shits on everyone not named Duncan or Malone, and it can be argued that his individual numbers are superior to both. People forget just how good Barkley really was.[/quote]
I would like to see someone try to argue that Barkley’s numbers are better than Malone’s.
[quote]jbpick86 wrote:
[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
[quote]mbdix wrote:
[quote]flipcollar wrote:
[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
[quote]tsantos wrote:
Still, Sir Charles for a short fat-ass having to go up against monsters was a very good player (and funny as hell) [/quote]
Barkley was an athletic freak of nature and one of the top 3 power forwards of all time. Calling him a “short fatass” and “very good” is a complete disservice to his place in the game.[/quote]
Kevin Garnett, Dirk Nowitzki, Tim Duncan. Just to name a few PF’s still playing who are better than Barkley was. I love Barkley and all, but top 3 of all time? That’s a reach.[/quote]
I would take Karl Malone, Larry Bird, and Shawn Kemp over Barkley also. [/quote]
Bird was a small forward and Kemp had five good seasons. Barkley shits on everyone not named Duncan or Malone, and it can be argued that his individual numbers are superior to both. People forget just how good Barkley really was.[/quote]
I would like to see someone try to argue that Barkley’s numbers are better than Malone’s.
[/quote]
Malone had a higher scoring average, but he also played with the best passing pg of all time. Barkley was a better rebounder, better passer and shot a higher % from the field.
[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
Malone had a higher scoring average, but he also played with the best passing pg of all time. Barkley was a better rebounder, better passer and shot a higher % from the field.[/quote]
Best argument in favor of Malone is durability and longevity. Barkley played 12 really good seasons and had his last really good season at the age of 33; even in his best seasons, he always missed a couple of games. Malone played 80+ games in every one of his first eighteen seasons (exception being the lockout season, when he played 49 of a possible 50), made the All-Star team for 15 straight seasons, and, at the age of 39 years old, turned in a 21 ppg-8 rpg-5 apg season in which he started 81 games. At age 39! Chuck had been retired for three years by then.
I’ll agree with you that peak-level Barkley was every bit as good, or better, than Malone. I think Malone’s durability and longevity sets him apart for better overall career.
I betcha Karl Malone could out-lift almost everyone who has every played in the NBA. He probably still could lift more than most active players, and he’s been retired for a decade or so.
[quote]ActivitiesGuy wrote:
[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
Malone had a higher scoring average, but he also played with the best passing pg of all time. Barkley was a better rebounder, better passer and shot a higher % from the field.[/quote]
Best argument in favor of Malone is durability and longevity. Barkley played 12 really good seasons and had his last really good season at the age of 33; even in his best seasons, he always missed a couple of games. Malone played 80+ games in every one of his first eighteen seasons (exception being the lockout season, when he played 49 of a possible 50), made the All-Star team for 15 straight seasons, and, at the age of 39 years old, turned in a 21 ppg-8 rpg-5 apg season in which he started 81 games. At age 39! Chuck had been retired for three years by then.
I’ll agree with you that peak-level Barkley was every bit as good, or better, than Malone. I think Malone’s durability and longevity sets him apart for better overall career.[/quote]
Agreed on Malone’s durability. He was one of the main guys of that era to embrace strength and conditioning. Also wanted to point out that LeBron James’ size is greatly exaggerated. Malone was listed at 6’9 250-265, and James is consistently listed between 260-270. James would look wiry next to prime Malone.
[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
James would look wiry next to prime Malone.[/quote]
having watched lebron play with ben wallace when he was here(cavs), i’m going to disagree based on the fact that it was easy to confuse the 2 while on the court. lebron is a beast.
Duncan > Barkley > Malone > KG > Dirk
I’m probably forgetting someone, but it’s not Kemp. He was one of my favorite players growing up, but being a freaky dunker does not mean he was an all time great.
Barkley reminds me of a combination between a big baby glen davis body type, but with the skill of Dirk.
[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
Also wanted to point out that LeBron James’ size is greatly exaggerated. Malone was listed at 6’9 250-265, and James is consistently listed between 260-270. James would look wiry next to prime Malone.[/quote]
I don’t think LeBron’s weight is exaggerated (although to be sure, some roster sizes are exaggerated; I was listed on my college football roster at 6’1" and 260 pounds despite being about 5’11" and 240, lol).
Think about how different some guys can look at the same size. In my avatar picture, I am 5’11" and 205 pounds. There are surely a few guys in the 190-200 range that look WAY bigger than I look in that photo.
Basically, I believe it that LeBron is 260, and that Malone played around the same weight. Their weight is just distributed a little differently.
[quote]Aggv wrote:
Duncan > Barkley > Malone > KG > Dirk
[/quote]
I’d probably put Malone ahead of Barkley if we’re talking “overall career.”
If we’re talking “best single-season peak” or even “best three-year peak” then I’ll give you Barkley over Malone.
I’d also have KG and Dirk at 4 and 5, respectively. KG was so much better defensively that it outweighs Dirk’s slightly more well-rounded offensive game.
I can’t think of any other contemporaries that belong in this conversation. Like I said, there might be some guys from the 1950’s and 1960’s, but the game (and the Association) was SO different then that I can’t really make a fair comparison across eras.
My bad on Bird. I thought he played some power forward in most games. I know he could play both. Parrish center and Kevin power forward?
I think it’s easier to think about who’s better based on if you’re picking a team and the players are all 19yr old rookies. What order do you pick them in?
Where would Malone be with out stockton?
Who was the 2nd best player on any barkley team?
Did Malone ever win a MVP?
[quote]mbdix wrote:
[quote]flipcollar wrote:
[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
[quote]tsantos wrote:
Still, Sir Charles for a short fat-ass having to go up against monsters was a very good player (and funny as hell) [/quote]
Barkley was an athletic freak of nature and one of the top 3 power forwards of all time. Calling him a “short fatass” and “very good” is a complete disservice to his place in the game.[/quote]
Kevin Garnett, Dirk Nowitzki, Tim Duncan. Just to name a few PF’s still playing who are better than Barkley was. I love Barkley and all, but top 3 of all time? That’s a reach.[/quote]
I would take Karl Malone, Larry Bird, and Shawn Kemp over Barkley also. [/quote]
You had me until Kemp…come on now bro…come on.
