I hate the disparaging of Karl Malone who is consensus top 15...

[AussieSteve]

When two players are close statistically as Malone and Barkley are, it's the intangibles that break the tie and is this case convincingly swing the pendulum to one side. Malone was:

- more healthy and took care of his body better
- had a superior mental approach to the game
- played smarter and didn't take stupid 3pt shots
- infinitely more committed on the defensive end

AussieSteve you are attacking Pointguard for using anecdotes but he was bang on regarding everything he said. And you are overrating efficiency. Adrian Dantley was scoring 30 ppg on monster efficiency in his prime and he was one of the biggest cancers on the court. Every team he left became better afterwards.

Please no more cherry-picked stats...

In 1992, fifteen out of twenty-two NBA general managers said they would have Malone over Barkley. And that of course is before Karl had any kind of longevity edge.

In 1989, 1992, 1994, and 1995 which were all seasons in Barkley's prime, Malone finished higher in MVP voting and also had decisively stronger postseason runs in the last three. In the eight seasons that both men were in their primes from 1988-1995, their MVP votes and RealGM player of the year votes were split exactly in half. Clearly people at the time didn't consider Barkley to be way better.

I'm getting tired of repeating myself and talking to a wall. I've made my case and it's clear as day.

You can't say that Malone was better than Barkley in 1989, 1992, 1994, and 1995, simply because he finished higher in the MVP! You and I both know that the number of games a player misses, and the number of wins his team gets matters in MVP voting. So if two players have play a similar number of games and their teams have a similar number of wins, then the MVP comparison is appropriate. In 94, Barkley missed 17 games. In 89 and 92 he played in horrible teams. There was never a season during Barkley's prime in which he played a comparable number of games and his team had a comparable number of wins, that he didn't dominate Malone in the MVP voting.

- In '87 he missed 14 games (5 games more than any other player who received even a single place vote) and his team won 45 games, and he finished a whisker out of the top 5 in the MVP. (and don't forget three of the guys above him were Jordan, Magic and Bird)
- In '88, Philly won 36 games, and Barkley still finished ahead of Malone, even though the Jazz had 11 more wins. In fact Chuck beat out everyone that year except for Jordan, Magic and Bird. That is unheard of on a 36 win team!
- In '90 he had more 1st place votes (a lot more) than prime Magic and prime Jordan and finished way ahead of Malone, even though his team had less wins than all of theirs.
- In '91, he missed 15 games in a team that won only 44 games and still finished above Malone, who had 10 more wins and played every game. Only Jordan, Magic and Robinson beat him.
- In '93 he won the MVP over Jordan and Hakeem in their primes.

Don't you think he would have had to play consistently at a pretty high level to achieve the above? Do you really think that Malone was ever able to play at that level?

[COLOR="Red"]Barkley is the only person not named Magic Johnson or Hakeem Olajuwon to beat prime MJ in the MVP, and the only person not named Magic to do it more than once. He is also the only person not named Michael Jordan to beat Magic Johnson after 1986.[/COLOR] (I say he beat Magic because we all know he did) Barkley's MVP credentials are superior to Malone. Malone beat out Alonzo Mourning and past his prime Jordan for his MVPs. Barkley's peak coincided with Jordan's, Magic's, Hakeem's and the tail end of Bird's.

I'm all for Malone being above Chuck on a GOAT list, because of his longevity, consistence etc. But, there is no way that anyone ever thought he was better than Barkley at any point before 1995.

[Round Mound]

Barkley > Stockton-To-Malone

[Pointguard]

I tend to agree to some extent. There's no doubt that Malone would have been a perennial all-star and All-NBA, and most likely scored 30+ thousand points, even without Stockton. But if you plot Malone's PPG against Stockton's APG, they're incredibly correlated, until about 1996-97, when Stockton's assists started to drop off. Many would say that Malone's best seasons were 96-97 and 97-98, and he averaged 27 PPG both seasons. So I would suggest that if Malone had a very good PG, rather than an all time-great one, for his whole career, 27-28 PPG might have been his peak scoring output, rather than 31 PPG... similar to Barkley. But even if we took 3 PPG off him for the nine years that Stockton was elite, he'd still have ended up with 34+ thousand points and be second all time. So the people who say that Stockton made Malone, are obviously either ignorant or trolling.

As an aside, I also think that if Barkley had even a very good PG when he was at his peak from 88 to 93 you could easily add a couple of PPG. So maybe his peak scoring year might have been up around the 30PPG mark with a John Stockton c.1997 PG. (I know he had KJ in 93, but he missed half the season and was well below his best)

Malone was human his peak should have been closer to Barkley's peak age wise. Malone was old in some of his best scoring years. So I wouldn't have him being less effective in his peak scoring wise. The pick and roll was a very predictable play. When Malone hits his peak at 33 and 34 yo, that team won on Malone being more predominant in the overall scheme. Both Malone and Barkley could have thrived in a more running type system and its a shame they both could have been in better systems.

I think Barkley would have had Stockton traded after two years. I don't know of any two people that could repeat the same play over and over again. I got tired of watching it. I hated watching it over and over again. I couldn't even respect it while they played together anymore. I hated the play until I got into Steve Nash doing variations with it.

[Round Mound]

Malone was human his peak should have been closer to Barkley's peak age wise. Malone was old in some of his best scoring years. So I wouldn't have him being less effective in his peak scoring wise. The pick and roll was a very predictable play. When Malone hits his peak at 33 and 34 yo, that team won on Malone being more predominant in the overall scheme. Both Malone and Barkley could have thrived in a more running type system and its a shame they both could have been in better systems.

I think Barkley would have had Stockton traded after two years. I don't know of any two people that could repeat the same play over and over again. I got tired of watching it. I hated watching it over and over again. I couldn't even respect it while they played together anymore. I hated the play until I got into Steve Nash doing variations with it.

I loved watching Stockton To Malone Pick and Roll. You didnt like it? It was predictable but unstoppable at the same time.

[Pointguard]

AussieSteve you are attacking Pointguard for using anecdotes but he was bang on regarding everything he said.

Yeah, could you imagine if Jordan made that joke about Malone? Nobody would get it and wouldn't take Jordan serious. That's when anecdotes are useful. As you stated, everybody knew that Malone came to play VERY seriously the whole game. Players left bruised and respecting him. And knew not to go too far with Stockton.

In 1992, fifteen out of twenty-two NBA general managers said they would have Malone over Barkley. And that of course is before Karl had any kind of longevity edge.

In 1989, 1992, 1994, and 1995 which were all seasons in Barkley's prime, Malone finished higher in MVP voting and also had decisively stronger postseason runs in the last three. In the eight seasons that both men were in their primes from 1988-1995, their MVP votes and RealGM player of the year votes were split exactly in half. Clearly people at the time didn't consider Barkley to be way better.

I'm getting tired of repeating myself and talking to a wall. I've made my case and it's clear as day.

[AussieSteve]

You can't say that Malone was better than Barkley in 1989, 1992, 1994, and 1995, simply because he finished higher in the MVP! You and I both know that the number of games a player misses, and the number of wins his team gets matters in MVP voting. So if two players have play a similar number of games and their teams have a similar number of wins, then the MVP comparison is appropriate. In 94, Barkley missed 17 games. In 89 and 92 he played in horrible teams. There was never a season during Barkley's prime in which he played a comparable number of games and his team had a comparable number of wins, that he didn't dominate Malone in the MVP voting.

- In '87 he missed 14 games (5 games more than any other player who received even a single place vote) and his team won 45 games, and he finished a whisker out of the top 5 in the MVP. (and don't forget three of the guys above him were Jordan, Magic and Bird)
- In '88, Philly won 36 games, and Barkley still finished ahead of Malone, even though the Jazz had 11 more wins. In fact Chuck beat out everyone that year except for Jordan, Magic and Bird. That is unheard of on a 36 win team!
- In '90 he had more 1st place votes (a lot more) than prime Magic and prime Jordan and finished way ahead of Malone, even though his team had less wins than all of theirs.
- In '91, he missed 15 games in a team that won only 44 games and still finished above Malone, who had 10 more wins and played every game. Only Jordan, Magic and Robinson beat him.
- In '93 he won the MVP over Jordan and Hakeem in their primes.

Don't you think he would have had to play consistently at a pretty high level to achieve the above? Do you really think that Malone was ever able to play at that level?

[COLOR="Red"]Barkley is the only person not named Magic Johnson or Hakeem Olajuwon to beat prime MJ in the MVP, and the only person not named Magic to do it more than once. He is also the only person not named Michael Jordan to beat Magic Johnson after 1986.[/COLOR] (I say he beat Magic because we all know he did) Barkley's MVP credentials are superior to Malone. Malone beat out Alonzo Mourning and past his prime Jordan for his MVPs. Barkley's peak coincided with Jordan's, Magic's, Hakeem's and the tail end of Bird's.

I'm all for Malone being above Chuck on a GOAT list, because of his longevity, consistence etc. But, there is no way that anyone ever thought he was better than Barkley at any point before 1995.

Just to drive this point home... there were only two seasons during Barkley's prime when his team won more than 50 games AND he did not miss games through injury. BOTH times he won the most 1st place MVP votes, by a large margin. Once over prime Magic and prime Jordan, and then over prime Hakeem and prime Jordan again. Malone played in 50+ win teams for most of his career, and remained injury free. His only MVP wins came by narrow margins, and over far inferior competition.

[MrFonzworth]

Barkley never knocked up a 12 yr old

[SamuraiSWISH]

Barkley never knocked up a 12 yr old

Disgusting

[ArbitraryWater]

I like how OP decided that he's consensus (he probably is)

[Round Mound]

Italian Video From 1992 on Sir Charles:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kiNvY93EmWc

[COLOR="Blue"]Minute =2:44[/COLOR]

[COLOR="Blue"]"...For The Majority, The 2nd Best Player Behined Michael Jordan..."[/COLOR]

In Italy and the World in 1992 he was considered the 2nd best player behined MJ.

Malone was never consired the 2nd best player in MJs prime.

[tomtucker]

Malone claimed it was consensus , but she was still under 15

[MrFonzworth]

Barkley was a star on the dream team, Malone was a role player. Malone knocked up a 12 year old at the same time Barkley was getting married.

Barkley > Malone

[AussieSteve]

Let's keep it about basketball guys... both Barkley and Malone have both had their issues off the court but its irrelevant to this discussion.

I just laid a knock out blow for Barkley and if people keep posting crap on here we won't get to see if dankok and co. can explain why Chuck thoroughly out MVP'd three GOATs at their peak, but Malone was never in MVP contention until there were no prime GOATs left in the league.

[AussieSteve]

This is a little history lesson about Barkley's and Malone's relationship with the MVP. It proves, I think, that while Malone was obviously more durable, Barkley was a far superior player in their primes.

Barkley and the MVP
For 11 seasons from 1986 to 1996 , Chuck only finished outside the top 6 in MVP voting three times. Once when he missed 17 games through injury, once when his team had just 35 wins and once when he missed 11 games and his team won only 41 games.

There were only two seasons during Barkley's prime when his team won more than 46 games AND he played over 70 games. BOTH times he was the MVP. (He only gets recognised for one of them, but no one disputes that if voting was made public in 1990 as it is today, he definitely wins that one as well.) In 1990 he had 41% more first place votes than Magic, with Jordan third. A number of writers who held a grudge, purposely left Barkley off the ballot entirely (voting instead for the likes of Tom Chambers and Buck Williams). In 1993 he won in a landslide over Hakeem, with Jordan third again. Both years, every player in the top 7 were consensus top 40 GOATs in their primes.

Every other season in his prime he either played less than 70 games, and/or his team won 46 games or less, and he still finished in the top 6.

Barkley is the only person not named Magic or Hakeem to beat prime MJ in MVP voting, and the only person not named Magic to do it more than once. He is also the only person not named Michael Jordan to beat Magic after 1986.

Barkley was able to out-vote each of Magic, Jordan, Hakeem, Malone and Robinson, playing fewer games AND with his team having fewer wins than theirs, at least once, while all were in their primes (multiple times for Hakeem and Malone).

Conclusion: If Barkley was on a winning team and had an injury free season, he was the MVP, regardless of the competition. We can safely say that had injuries not plagued his prime, or if his prime wasn’t wasted on pitiful teams and coinciding with one of the strongest era’s in NBA history, he would have a handful of MVPs.

Malone and the MVP
Malone played at least 80 games, and the Jazz won at least 47 games every single season of his prime. Let's first focus on his nine prime seasons prior to 1997. He finished 8th the two times that they had under 50 wins and he finished 7th twice, after playing every game on 53 and 55 win teams. He also finished third twice, but the only year he was really a contender was 1995, when the Jazz had 60 wins and he finished behind Robinson and Shaq. That year the only top 40 GOATs behind him who didn’t miss at least 10 games and were somewhat close to their peaks were Ewing and Pippen.

Malone never finished higher than Jordan, Magic, Robinson (except in Robinsons rookie year) or Shaq (except once when Shaq missed 28 games), and the only times he out-voted Barkley or Hakeem, were when they missed 10 or more games to injury and/or their teams had significantly fewer wins than the Jazz.

But something happened in 1997. The stars aligned for Malone to win an MVP. All the GOATs were gone. Robinson, Shaq and Barkley all missed lots of games, Hakeem had officially exited his prime, and statistically Jordan had the worst full season of his career. Malone reaped the rewards of his longevity and squeezed out an MVP over the weakest field the NBA had seen in decades. (After Jordan, the top 6 were rounded out by Grant Hill, Tim Hardaway, Glen Rice and Gary Payton). Even still, this award is largely disputed as being rightfully MJs. In ‘98, Malone came second behind Jordan, with Payton third. Shaq came fourth on only 60 games!! Rookie Tim Duncan was fifth and Hardaway sixth. In ’99 Malone won again, by a slim margin over Alonzo Mourning, which tells you about the strength of the field that year. And once again, this is a widely disputed result, with many feeling that BOTH Mourning or Duncan were more deserving winners. Also note that in both of Malone's MVP years, the Jazz had a the most wins in the West.

Conclusion: For Malone to be a MVP contender he needed to be on a .700+ team, and have historically weak competition. If one or both of these conditions was not true, he rarely threatened the leader board. We can safely say that had his prime not spilled into such a historically weak era, or had he played on a weaker team, he would never have truly been an MVP contender.


And if you don't believe me that Barkley throghouly deserved the 1990 MVP, and Malone likely didn't deserve either of his, here are some links for you to convince yourself.
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/5...ll-time/page/2
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/5...ll-time/page/9
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/5...ll-time/page/6
http://www.complex.com/sports/2015/0...actually-wasnt
http://www.foxsports.com/nba/photos/...ll-time-040715
http://www.thesportster.com/basketba...ving-nba-mvps/