Charles Barkley Shot Chart (1992-1993)

[Dwade305]

[QUOTE=Round Mound]

We Won an MVP In JORDAN

[PHILA]

PHILA Do You Remember When I Was Mentioning This (colored and bold) Before This Article Came Up? Lower Torso and Leg Strength Is Very Important In Positioning and Rebounding Tecniques. Just Imagine if Charles Would Have Done More Upper Torso Work Consistantly? It Would Have Been Insane.

Yes he would have had better longevity. A consistent weight program and better discipline in the off season would have extended his prime by a few years. Chances are he would have healthy in 1994 and 1995 in particular. Though his legs and core strength are among the best ever. There is really no ideal type of defender to put on him.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G6MajoWt-7U&t=27m39s




Some more from the article:

http://www.anthonyfalsone.com/press.asp?id=9

And most thought Barley's career would end before now. After watching him fight through near-crippling back pain in the 1995 playoffs while with Phoenix, everyone anticipated a big retirement speech when the Suns bowed out to the Rockets. Charles, however, persevered.

“Charles knows that in order to do the things that he wants to do his back has to be strong and stable, his legs have to be strong, and his knee has to be healthy. A few years ago he had a series of back stabilization exercises prescribed to him specifically. He's been consistent with them. He always experiences some level of back pain, but if he is consistent with the exercises we can keep it from being severe.”

“You know when Charles missed games this past year? The injuries were not related to his back or to his knee, problems he's had in the past. That's really a testament to his consistency with the (strength & conditioning) program.

A fact that Barkley confirms. “I haven't had any real back problems in a few years because I have stuck closely to the program.”

[Round Mound]

[QUOTE=PHILA]Yes he would have had better longevity. A consistent weight program and better discipline in the off season would have extended his prime by a few years. Chances are he would have healthy in 1994 and 1995 in particular. Though his legs and core strength are among the best ever. There is really no ideal type of defender to put on him.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G6MajoWt-7U&t=27m39s




Some more from the article:

http://www.anthonyfalsone.com/press.asp?id=9

And most thought Barley's career would end before now. After watching him fight through near-crippling back pain in the 1995 playoffs while with Phoenix, everyone anticipated a big retirement speech when the Suns bowed out to the Rockets. Charles, however, persevered.

[I]

[ShaqAttack3234]

Interesting information, thanks, Phila!

[QUOTE=Round Mound][B]To Bad Barkley did Not Play With KOBE O and Glen Rice, Ron Harper etc and By The Way. He Had Phil Jackson as Coach - Inst

[Round Mound]

Interesting information, thanks, Phila!



No need to be disingenuous, Round Mound, Glen Rice was nowhere near prime form when Shaq played with him. Rice was never the same after his elbow surgery in '99 and he wasn't particularly important to the 2000 Lakers, especially since he never really accepted his role or fit in to the triangle. That's why they made no effort to keep him, didn't even look for a replacement(merely promoted Rick Fox) and won 2 additional titles.

Ron Harper was a solid role player on the 2000 team for his defense, intelligence and knowledge of the triangle, but he was at the end of his career. Hardly the type of player you'd use to discredit Shaq's championship, especially since he wasn't an offensive threat anymore, and teams could pretty much dare him to shoot. Remember, the 2000 WCF when Mike Dunleavy had Pippen guard Harper for the sole purpose of being able to play off him and double Shaq on the catch?

And while Harper was indeed a solid contributor to the 2000 team, he was nowhere near irreplaceable as was proven the next 2 years when Harper pretty much couldn't play during the 2001 playoffs and retired altogether before 2002.

You're acting like those 2 players were still all-stars when they weren't close by 2000.



As far as Shaq shooting jumpers? Why on earth would there be any reason for him to shoot mid-range, much less outside shots? He had was unstoppable inside of 10 feet, and nobody could really push him farther out than that anyway.

As for being just a dunker? It's ridiculous to make this claim about prime Shaq. Yeah, he pretty much just dunked everything his first 2 years in the league(and was already pretty damn good doing it) but he continued to add to his game and rely less on dunks until peaking in 2000.

In 2001 for example, Shaq averaged 28.7 ppg. He had 219 dunks that season, or an average of 2.96 dunks per game, it doesn't take a math genius to figure out that's just under 6 ppg, 5.9 to be more precise. So where were the other 22.9 ppg coming from?

The fact is, Shaq didn't have the luxury of even dunking as much as he could have possibly once Phil took over. The reason for this is because Phil wanted him to adjust his game to work within the triangle, and he did. This involved going up with quicker shots, or passing out and they'd swing the ball or re-post if he didn't have the initial shot. This required him to go to more jump hooks and those short baseline fadeaways.

[B]Don

[ShaqAttack3234]

[QUOTE=Round Mound][B]Don

[Round Mound]

I don't want to get into a Shaq vs Barkley thing, I've always really liked both Shaq and Barkley too. My only issues were that I thought some of your comments were misleading, primarily listing Ron Harper as if he was anything more than a role player by 2000, and listing Glen Rice who was still a decent small forward, but a poor fit on the 2000 Lakers.

You're right about some things. Kobe was emerging around that time. He still had quite a bit of maturing to do as far as becoming physically stronger like he was later, improving his overall shooting(primarily range...his mid-range shot was already quite good in 2000, I remember commentators praising Kobe for this since the mid-range shot was already called a lost art) and decision making, primarily learning how to incorporate his already amazing individual ability into the team-concept.

But while his age(21) showed in some ways, he was already arguably the most capable perimeter scorer when allowed to be and among the absolute best perimeter guards as well as a remarkably poised and fearless player under pressure. I'd say at that point, while not an MVP-caliber player yet, he was about a top 10 player in the league, as opposed to a top 3 player as he was during 2001 and 2002.

You're also correct that he had some role players who were good defenders such as Harper, Horry and Shaw.

But the team did have quite a few glaring weaknesses. They didn't have much offensive talent outside of Shaq and Kobe and this was evident since they started 2 older players teams could play off of offensively(Harper and Green) as well as the fact they were one of the worst 3 point shooting teams in the league, had virtually no bench scoring, and they were very vulnerable at the PF position(which is a reason why both C-Webb and Sheed dominated them those playoffs)

So that's all I was saying, just not to get carried away. Shaq had a good team, but they weren't loaded from top to bottom or anything. Shaq had to have one of the all-time great seasons to win that year and it was especially difficult to overcome a more talented Blazer team that truly was stacked.

As Phil Jackson said "We were far from the most talented team in the league" and "We won 67 games on Shaq's back."

By the way, I agree with you about Phil Jackson as a coach. Shaq was very fortunate to play for Phil and I've always given Phil credit for taking Shaq to another level as a player, demanding more of him and helping him become a champion.

[B]Agree with what you said. Kobe emerged more in 2001 it was Shaq

[ShaqAttack3234]

[QUOTE=Round Mound][B]Agree with what you said. Kobe emerged more in 2001 it was Shaq

[Round Mound]

I agree on coaching. It's often overlooked, but extremely important. I agree that Barkley typically had pretty average coaches, not really great ones.

As far as his team, well, Barkley didn't have the talent to win a championship or seriously contend during his prime in Philly from about '88-'92. The Suns were very talented, but we only saw one year of prime Barkley there in '93 and then the injuries started to affect him in '94 to the point where he considered retiring already.

The Suns had a lot of offensive talent, but you're right, their interior defense was always weak. Hakeem and Otis Thorpe really took advantage of this in '94.

Pleasure To Listen To People That Where Actually There To Watch Barkley in his Prime. Indeed Otis Thorpe Was a Nasty Defender and Rebounder. Lets not forget about the 3-Point Bombers and Perimeter Defenders Houston had in Smith, Maxwell and Horry.

It was sad to Watch Barkley play after 1993 but Even Sadder to Watch him Play After 1996. I Stopped Watching B-Ball For a While After that Cause I Knew Charles Would Never Get His Ring and Would Be Hated For It So.

Sucks That All Players Today Are Judged By Rings Instead of Their Level of Play.

[PHILA]

29 more games added

Dec 4, 1987 - Sonics vs. Sixers *2 FGA
Mar 23, 1988 - Bulls vs. Sixers
Nov 28, 1988 - Lakers vs. Sixers
1989 Playoffs Gm. 2 Sixers vs. Knicks
1989 Playoffs Gm. 3 Knicks vs. Sixers
Nov 17, 1989 - Spurs vs. Sixers *2 FGA
Dec 7, 1990 - Nuggets vs. Sixers
Mar 17, 1991 - Sixers vs. Celtics
1994 Playoffs Warriors vs. Suns (Full Series) *5 FGA
1994 Playoffs Suns vs. Rockets (Full Series) * 6 FGA
Mar 13, 1994 - Suns vs. Magic
Jan 17, 1995 - Nuggets vs. Suns *4 FGA
Jan 22, 1995 - Magic vs. Suns *2 FGA
Feb 7, 1995 - Suns vs. Mavericks
Mar 16, 1995 - Suns vs. Hornets
Mar 21, 1995 - Suns vs. Magic *1 FGA
1995 Playoffs Gm. 3 Suns vs. Blazers
Jan 28, 1996 - Suns vs. Bulls
Feb 6, 1996 - Bulls vs. Suns
1996 Playoffs Gm. 2 Suns vs. Spurs
Nov 2, 1996 - Rockets vs. Suns



At Rim: 165/201 FG (82.1%)
In Paint (Overall): 188/274 FG (68.6%)
Mid-Range: 80/151 FG (53.0%)
3 Point: 34/92 FG (37.0%)

[PHILA]

Now we have an 84 game sample. Below the total stats for all games listed in this thread.


At Rim: 537/663 FG (81.0%)
In Paint (Overall): 600/862 FG (69.6%)
Mid-Range: 196/449 FG (43.7%)
3 Point: 63/202 FG (31.2%)

[Round Mound]

Now we have an 83 game sample. Below the total stats for all games listed in this thread.


At Rim: 537/663 FG (81.0%)
In Paint (Overall): 600/862 FG (69.6%)
Mid-Range: 196/449 FG (43.7%)
3 Point: 63/202 FG (31.2%)

[fpliii]

Now we have an 83 game sample. Below the total stats for all games listed in this thread.


At Rim: 537/663 FG (81.0%)
In Paint (Overall): 600/862 FG (69.6%)
Mid-Range: 196/449 FG (43.7%)
3 Point: 63/202 FG (31.2%)

81% is absolutely ridiculous. Especially for a sample that large.

[Round Mound]

81% is absolutely ridiculous. Especially for a sample that large.

[B]And The Amazing Thing is that Most People Think Barkley Was Just a Fast Break Coast To Coast Finisher and All Dunks or Amazing Shot Blocks. Chuck

[PHILA]

[quote=Round Mound][B]And The Amazing Thing is that Most People Think Barkley Was Just a Fast Break Coast To Coast Finisher and All Dunks or Amazing Shot Blocks. Chuck