The Crazy idea that Sir Charles Barkley didn't have help

[guy]

By the way, I love how some people who try to downplay Kobe's help just refer to prime Shaq as a HOFer or all-star Getting to play with Shaq in 2000 is not the equivalent of playing with Dr. J in 1987, KJ in 1993, Hakeem in 1997, Drexler in 1998, or Pippen in 1999. Not even close.

[andgar923]

Umm okay. You can do the same for alot of Barkley's teammates too, especially KJ, Hakeem, and Clyde who were very injury prone when they played with Barkley.

Gasol also has one All-NBA 2nd team. You realize Rodman has only 2 all-star games, 2 All-NBA third teams, and was never considered a leader of an NBA team right? And he's in the HOF. Gasol is going to make the HOF. Pretty much every NBA analyst thinks so and refers to him as a future HOFer. But I guess your opinion means more

Even if he is correct and he does't make the HOF, he's still the most talented/versatile center of his era and top 4 big man as well.

FACT is, Kobe can't win without big men, in a relatively weak big men era.

[andgar923]

By the way, I love how some people who try to downplay Kobe's help just refer to prime Shaq as a HOFer or all-star Getting to play with Shaq in 2000 is not the equivalent of playing with Dr. J in 1987, KJ in 1993, Hakeem in 1997, Drexler in 1998, or Pippen in 1999. Not even close.

I mean, only the most dominant player since Wilt, he's a nobody.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Not sure there is an argument for Charles > Kobe other than peak play (even that's close). Bean, in HIS peak, was an exceptional 2-way player and probably the better all-around player if we're talking pure basketball skills.

Like Dirk, I do feel Charles would have benefited playing w/ the help Kobe's been surrounded by. Guy would probably have cemented himself a top 10 player YEARS ago.

[KG215]

By the way, I love how some people who try to downplay Kobe's help just refer to prime Shaq as a HOFer or all-star Getting to play with Shaq in 2000 is not the equivalent of playing with Dr. J in 1987, KJ in 1993, Hakeem in 1997, Drexler in 1998, or Pippen in 1999. Not even close.

You have to realize something with Kobe stans. They think if they list factual things, and you don't take them at face value, you're the idiot for spitting in the face of factual information. Context is a completely foreign concept to them.

[DMAVS41]

It may not be fair, but Barkley's lack of a title keeps him behind a guy like Kobe with 5 titles.

If we remove all the career stuff and solely look at impact on the court. And for me all that really matters is the playoffs when discussing these all time greats...Barkley and Kobe are pretty close.

Barkley is definitely one of the best playoff performers in NBA history and I think his impact gets lost a bit in this generation. This is a guy who had a 27/14/4/2/1 playoff run to the finals in 93.

Like Kuvina said, switch up their circumstances and Barkley is for sure known as a top 10 player ever with a ton of rings.

Just the way it is.

[guy]

It may not be fair, but Barkley's lack of a title keeps him behind a guy like Kobe with 5 titles.

If we remove all the career stuff and solely look at impact on the court. And for me all that really matters is the playoffs when discussing these all time greats...Barkley and Kobe are pretty close.

Barkley is definitely one of the best playoff performers in NBA history and I think his impact gets lost a bit in this generation. This is a guy who had a 27/14/4/2/1 playoff run to the finals in 93.

Like Kuvina said, switch up their circumstances and Barkley is for sure known as a top 10 player ever with a ton of rings.

Just the way it is.

Switch up their circumstances and Kobe probably doesn't have any rings, but I highly doubt Barkley has 5 rings. Kobe had more help, but I still consider him a greater player regardless of circumstance.

[red1]

I'm one of the few that's stated Chuck>>>> Kobe

Yeah I said it.

He was an amazing player, moreso when one realizes his height at that position, simply unheard of Nobody his size has been as great at that position or even close to it, and he did it against a tough era inside the paint.

[Legends66NBA7]

I've always wondered what would happen if Magic Johnson and Kevin Garnett switched positions, rather than Magic on the Bulls or Garnett on the Spurs instead of Duncan. Literally Garnett from 79-80 and Magic from 95-96.

Would we still be considering Magic a Top 10 of all-time ? And would Garnett be considered Top 10 instead ?

[iamgine]

Switch up their circumstances and Kobe probably doesn't have any rings, but I highly doubt Barkley has 5 rings. Kobe had more help, but I still consider him a greater player regardless of circumstance.

If you switch em up, we need to account for the lack of good bigs and rule changes that surely would affect Barkley's game. He could be a lot better than he was as a result.

[guy]

If you switch em up, we need to account for the lack of good bigs and rule changes that surely would affect Barkley's game. He could be a lot better than he was as a result.

Barkley just didn't age well in comparison to Kobe. By the time Barkley would've gotten a good team to lead without Shaq i.e. 2008, that would've been 1995 Barkley. He was still a great player, but he was gradually declining and not that long after that he became a shell of himself. You couldn't compare 1995-2000 Barkley to 2008-2013 Kobe.

[andgar923]

Barkley just didn't age well in comparison to Kobe. By the time Barkley would've gotten a good team to lead without Shaq i.e. 2008, that would've been 1995 Barkley. He was still a great player, but he was gradually declining and not that long after that he became a shell of himself. You couldn't compare 1995-2000 Barkley to 2008-2013 Kobe.

Aside from his weight and conditioning, I wonder how much physical play had to do with his decline.

Chuck played in a very physical era in the most physical spot on the court, agasint bigger players. I'm sure that played a significant role in his decline. Other players at his position were taller, so the decline may not have been as noticeable. Chuck's game was unique than other front court player's game, he relied on athleticism to be consistent. He wasn't being guarded by players his same height as Wade would.

[iamgine]

Barkley just didn't age well in comparison to Kobe. By the time Barkley would've gotten a good team to lead without Shaq i.e. 2008, that would've been 1995 Barkley. He was still a great player, but he was gradually declining and not that long after that he became a shell of himself. You couldn't compare 1995-2000 Barkley to 2008-2013 Kobe.

Well Barkley coulda won in '99 and '04 in addition to the threepeat so that's potentially 5 rings. I think they'd have the best team in the league in '99 and '04 so it's a decent chance. Shaq-Kobe feud doesn't happen so who knows if Shaq stays. Also, he was declining in '95 but the lack of big and rule change might have helped him a ton.

[kennethgriffin]

Umm okay. You can do the same for alot of Barkley's teammates too, especially KJ, Hakeem, and Clyde who were very injury prone when they played with Barkley.

Gasol also has one All-NBA 2nd team. You realize Rodman has only 2 all-star games, 2 All-NBA third teams, and was never considered a leader of an NBA team right? And he's in the HOF. Gasol is going to make the HOF. Pretty much every NBA analyst thinks so and refers to him as a future HOFer. But I guess your opinion means more

Maybe if gasol was a defensive and rebounding legend who was a corner stone for multiple legendary championship runs.. Then maybe i could accept that insane comparisons of offensive all nba achievements. Or popularity allstar games. And everyone hated rodman. Evwn the coaches picking the reserves. So ya..... Try again

[guy]

Maybe if gasol was a defensive and rebounding legend who was a corner stone for multiple legendary championship runs.. Then maybe i could accept that insane comparisons of offensive all nba achievements. Or popularity allstar games. And everyone hated rodman. Evwn the coaches picking the reserves. So ya..... Try again

Ummm, so you're just going to change your criteria for whatever fits your agenda? Not surprising coming from you.