Charles Barkley on why Michael Jordan won

[97 bulls]

https://youtu.be/ykMgwNDsH8c

And this sentiment is echoed by many others. In particular Clyde Drexler and Karl Malone. Both give Pippen full credit for his role in six championships. And both feel theh would've won had he been on their team as well.

And Jordan didn't argue it either.

Mind you. This is NOT an indictment of Jordan. He's the greatest ever to play. But it gives a perspective on how Pippens peers felt about him. And how overrated winning as the "man" is. Pippen played a huge role in the Bulls six titles, record setting 72 win season,.qnd their 69 win season.

I like how Oprah looks at Jordan as if to say "he has a point Mike"

[ClipperRevival]

Since when did people take Barkley's opinions seriously? Half the shit he spews is BS. Plus, the guy was "the man" for his epic choke jobs in 1994 and 1995 against Houston. If he had won as "the man" he would think differently.

[97 bulls]

Since when did people take Barkley's opinions seriously? Half the shit he spews is BS. Plus, the guy was "the man" for his epic choke jobs in 1994 and 1995 against Houston. If he had won as "the man" he would think differently.

Jordan didn't disagree with it.

[kennethgriffin]

barkley and shaq both have kobe in their top 5 players all time




pick your poison

[ClipperRevival]

Jordan didn't disagree with it.

Saw the video. It was like a 5 second reference and Barkley was joking after MJ said Barkley never won anything. Come on.

[superteamtheory]

He's even clearer in the "Sir Charles @ 50" doc..

It's the defence. Pippen's D could cage a star a la FMVPs Kawhi and Iggy... Barkley in 93 could have handled the mano es mano with Jordan (not other years but in 93 yeah) or just dealing with Pippen's D... but having two top defenders on him was a bit much..

On the other hand, if you don't give the Bulls that, they suddenly don't have the depth to compete with the Suns .. then MJ would be the one saying "well shit I gotta beat Barkley and KJ and all I have is Horace"... so I'm not sure what to make of 93 exactly other than to say I think the Bulls had a slight advantage if only because MJ > Barkley even if Barkley is at his very best..

93 over Barkley's Suns is actually one of the better years in terms of the Bulls earning it. So is 91 and 97. These three truly great years lead me to believe that in less ideal circumstances MJ still would have finished with at least 3 rings no matter what. (Possibly 4. I think the 5 & 6 is ring padding thanks to his franchise situation.) 3 rings coupled with stats would still give him a great argument for GOAT vs. his peers Magic (who with Kareem got 5), Bird (who got 3 with a fair/reasonable amount of help), Duncan (who got 5 over time with at least 4 other HOFamers) and Kobe (had Shaq for 3 of the 5).. Considering there are doubters of the Wilt, Russell (had 3 other HOFamers and strong rosters over the course of the run) and Kareem (had Oscar & Magic), even just 3 rings would give him the argument in general, as it would any best of generation player... and one of the best arguments is how much talent were you matched against vs. how much you had to throw back...

That's why the 3 wins achieved by Knicks in 92 and Pacers in 98 were nothing short of amazing and those teams should be given major props.. Pacers were also great vs. Heat in 2013.. Cavs were great vs. prime K.G. Celtics in 08.. Etc.

[97 bulls]

Saw the video. It was like a 5 second reference and Barkley was joking after MJ said Barkley never won anything. Come on.

What are you talking about? You don't think he meant what he said?

[ClipperRevival]

He's even clearer in the "Sir Charles @ 50" doc..

It's the defence. Pippen's D could cage a star a la FMVPs Kawhi and Iggy... Barkley in 93 could have handled the mano es mano with Jordan (not other years but in 93 yeah) or just dealing with Pippen's D... but having two top defenders on him was a bit much..

On the other hand, if you don't give the Bulls that, they suddenly don't have the depth to compete with the Suns .. then MJ would be the one saying "well shit I gotta beat Barkley and KJ and all I have is Horace"... so I'm not sure what to make of 93 exactly other than to say I think the Bulls had a slight advantage if only because MJ > Barkley even if Barkley is at his very best..

93 over Barkley's Suns is actually one of the better years in terms of the Bulls earning it. So is 91 and 97. These three truly great years lead me to believe that in less ideal circumstances MJ still would have finished with at least 3 rings no matter what. (Possibly 4. I think the 5 & 6 is ring padding thanks to his franchise situation.) 3 rings coupled with stats would still give him a great argument for GOAT vs. his peers Magic (who with Kareem got 5), Bird (who got 3 with a fair/reasonable amount of help), Duncan (who got 5 over time with at least 4 other HOFamers) and Kobe (had Shaq for 3 of the 5).. Considering there are doubters of the Wilt, Russell (had 3 other HOFamers and strong rosters over the course of the run) and Kareem (had Oscar & Magic), even just 3 rings would give him the argument in general, as it would any best of generation player... and one of the best arguments is how much talent were you matched against vs. how much you had to throw back...

That's why the 3 wins achieved by Knicks in 92 and Pacers in 98 were nothing short of amazing and those teams should be given major props.. Pacers were also great vs. Heat in 2013.. Cavs were great vs. prime K.G. Celtics in 08.. Etc.

MJ really can't win in some fan's eyes. He goes 6/6, he faced bums. He loses a few, they say he was overrated. The fact is, MJ came, he saw and conquered the basketball world. Took on all comers and slayed them all once he figured out how to win..

Teams like the 1992-1994 Knicks could be looked upon as a historical team had they won a ring. That 1992 team took MJ's Bulls to 7 games. And that 1994 team lost in 7 games to the Rockets in the finals. That was a great team.

And also, the 1998 Pacers. The Bulls were an old team by then and the Pacers took them to 7 also.

Then there are all the teams we know about that he slayed in the finals. MJ faced a whose, who of teams led by all time greats. That Jazz team was great and without MJ's heroics in game 6 at Utah in 1998, guess where game 7 is played? Utah. But he imposed his will on the game and didn't let it get to that dire position.

[ClipperRevival]

This is why I never bought into the notion that a great player can't impact the outcome of games and if he never wins a ring, it wasn't his fault. I understand SOME players never had help but that's usually the exception.

Take Barkley for example. From 1993 to 1995, you can argue he had the best team in bball. His team was up 3-1 against the Rockets and couldn't close them out in games 5, 6 and 7 (5 and 7 at home). That's on your leader if you choke that badly.

Same with Robinson. Best team in bball in 1995. Meets 6th seed Rockets and gets destroyed by Hakeem in the wcf.

Same with Malone and Jazz. 1998, game 6, they are at home and up one point with possession with 30 seconds left. They score, they put the game away and force a game 7, which is in Utah. We know what happens. MJ imposes his will on both ends. Malone chokes by being careless when it mattered most.

There is such a thing as clutch ability. And the greats that choke when it mattered most shouldn't be given a free pass and just say, "teams win games." That's BS. Great players impose their will on the game. Ask MJ and Hakeem.

[guy]

https://youtu.be/ykMgwNDsH8c

And this sentiment is echoed by many others. In particular Clyde Drexler and Karl Malone. Both give Pippen full credit for his role in six championships. And both feel theh would've won had he been on their team as well.

And Jordan didn't argue it either.

Mind you. This is NOT an indictment of Jordan. He's the greatest ever to play. But it gives a perspective on how Pippens peers felt about him. And how overrated winning as the "man" is. Pippen played a huge role in the Bulls six titles, record setting 72 win season,.qnd their 69 win season.

I like how Oprah looks at Jordan as if to say "he has a point Mike"

You actually expect Jordan to throw Pippen under the bus by arguing that?

For you to take any of those opinions seriously is a joke. Malone and Clyde are two of the saltiest players ever. Malone literally chose Pippen over Jordan in his fantasy starting 5 and Clyde is a broken record of excuses (said the same thing about Magic too).

And Barkley? He's said numerous times that when they met in 93 he felt he had enough but just had to admit that Jordan was better then him. He also has played with Dr. J and Moses, KJ, Hakeem and Clyde (while Jordan was playing with Pippen and Rodman). Oh and by the way, there's probably no one that has belittled Pippen more publicly then Barkley.

Pippen was great, but the main difference between Jordan winning and those guys winning was not Pippen. It was the fact that Jordan was clearly better then those guys.

[superteamtheory]

MJ really can't win in some fan's eyes.

No, it's not that, he won in my eyes too, in everybody's, he's the one unless LBJ goes on some impossible late run and wins the next 4-5 years..

and I never said he played bums.. You're oversimplifying / common desperate tactic..

Y'all just want something else where he's given his own planet to live on and we can't even mention the other top 10s-20s without insulting him...

That's not respect, that's worship/****suck..

Even he doesn't do that. Sure he always makes clear he's #1 and could beat Bron etc. (less sure about Kobe but still confident of course why wouldn't he be) but he's also giving props to modern players all the time, even Mello he digs.. He doesn't act like these guys wouldn't have a shot against him, he knows they're great.. even if he's greater..

It can be both.. It can be that his Bulls team as a strong team gained momentum over all their competition but that he was still the greatest..

Can't win is LBJ's situation where a series statline of 38 8 8 1 and 1 on +.500% is a "choke" in the delusional eyes of the 3Balls of the world.. Can't win is when you are clearly the man in 2012 and all people want to talk about is your "stacked" team when he played at least 2 other teams that year just as stacked... Etc.

[ClipperRevival]

No, it's not that, he won in my eyes too, in everybody's, he's the one unless LBJ goes on some impossible late run and wins the next 4-5 years..

and I never said he played bums.. You're oversimplifying / common desperate tactic..

Y'all just want something else where he's given his own planet to live on and we can't even mention the other top 10s-20s without insulting him...

That's not respect, that's worship/****suck..

Even he doesn't do that. Sure he always makes clear he's #1 and could beat Bron etc. (less sure about Kobe but still confident of course why wouldn't he be) but he's also giving props to modern players all the time, even Mello he digs.. He doesn't act like these guys wouldn't have a shot against him, he knows they're great.. even if he's greater..

It can be both.. It can be that his Bulls team as a strong team gained momentum over all their competition but that he was still the greatest..

Can't win is LBJ's situation where a series statline of 38 8 8 1 and 1 on +.500% is a "choke" in the delusional eyes of the 3Balls of the world.. Can't win is when you are clearly the man in 2012 and all people want to talk about is your "stacked" team when he played at least 2 other teams that year just as stacked... Etc.

Lol. You misunderstood me. I was in agreement with your post and I was referring to the MJ haters. You were properly praising MJ, mentioning the 1992 Knicks and 1998 Pacers and I was piggybacking off of that.

[ClipperRevival]

What are you talking about? You don't think he meant what he said?

I don't take what Barkley has to say seriously. He talks out of his ass a lot.

[StephHamann]

Pippen's schlong was too much to handle

[DonDadda59]

Charles Barkley. Clyde Drexler. Karl Malone

What does Patrick Ewing have to say about this?

What do all those names have in common? I'll give you one guess.