Charles Barkley > Karl Malone

[Round Mound]

**** numbers. My eyes said Charles was the better player. My eyes said Charles was one of the greatest to play. My eyes also said Charles should have played better D.

Charles was lazy on defense but when he played Hard D he was good. Good enough to be in the Top 7th Defensive Rating. Malone was a Better Post Defender not like he was WAY BETTER but He was.

Everything Else, Everythinbg.... Barkley was Better than Malone, especially in clutch situations where Malone shot 46% For his Career in the Play-Offs and Only Shot above 50% for 2 in 19 play-offs

I don`t hate Malone i just hate kiddos that saw the NBA from 96 on

They missed the heatlhy Barkley.

[Round Mound]

**** numbers. My eyes said Charles was the better player. My eyes said Charles was one of the greatest to play. My eyes also said Charles should have played better D.

Agreed

[Borat]

A few things, from an unbiased PoV.

Barkley played like a small forward. But he was strong and a great rebounder/leaper so he could play power forward. Although he didn't really guard any position at an above average level.

Malone was a prototypical 4. He was phenomonal at accumulating points. He actually also had great passing and ball handling skills in general. He was a good rebounder. As his career matured his defence became extremely good. Elite. All great fundamentals and below the rim type D.

At their absolute peak, Barkley was a better player. But not by much.

As a career, Malone sh!ts on Barkley. Malone worked his a$$ to the bone to stay in shape and not miss games.
Charles got injuries, and being out of shape did not help this. Karl was twice as professional as Barkley.
Malone also had a bearable personality and was compatible with team mates. which helps. Charles was a jerk and probably still is. Malone had his troubles as a teenager, but he grew older as he matured. Barkley is still a kid to this day.

I'd draft Malone over him knowing how these people progressed.

[Round Mound]

A few things, from an unbiased PoV.

Barkley played like a small forward. But he was strong and a great rebounder/leaper so he could play power forward. Although he didn't really guard any position at an above average level.

Malone was a prototypical 4. He was phenomonal at accumulating points. He actually also had great passing and ball handling skills in general. He was a good rebounder. As his career matured his defence became extremely good. Elite. All great fundamentals and below the rim type D.

At their absolute peak, Barkley was a better player. But not by much.

As a career, Malone sh!ts on Barkley. Malone worked his a$$ to the bone to stay in shape and not miss games.
Charles got injuries, and being out of shape did not help this. Karl was twice as professional as Barkley.
Malone also had a bearable personality and was compatible with team mates. which helps. Charles was a jerk and probably still is. Malone had his troubles as a teenager, but he grew older as he matured. Barkley is still a kid to this day.

I'd draft Malone over him knowing how these people progressed.

Barkley was a Better Total Player than Malone none of this Longevity crap again .

Barkley when both where healthy and prime not Only Outplayed Him But Had a Higher PER, EFF, Plus/Minus, Shot Made/Missed Diferential, OWS, WS, WS Per 48 Minutes

Its only from 1995-96 on that Malone was Better and thats when they where closing on 33 years old.

So Barkley was Better for 80% of his Career which was shorter than Malones because he had worked so hard with nobodies from 86-92 while Malone had a The Top Shot Blokcer and Rim Protector (who could also Rebound 8-9 per game) in Eaton and was part of a System Designed by Sloan and Run By Stockton to Score easy buckets with the GOAT Pure Creator Ever.

Barkley was constatly bac kinjured like Bird and destroyed his knees 97 on.

So who gives a **** if he was lazier. He was a Stud and was just Better.

You say Malone was Mature? He knocked up a Teen Ager and Never Was There For His Baby Girl for Years.

Charles is funny becaus he always was and also he was hated more than Malone because he was smaller, talked trash and backed up. Malone never did back up anything because he fell shorter in big games

Charles Barkley was a Total Better Player than Karl. He could Do Morte Things and Dominated.

Malone shot 50% TWICE for His 19 Year Play-Off Career in the Play-offs. And a Total of 46%: SF or Guard Efficiency while Barkley dominated Play-Off Games on his OWN.

Charles was Better, Simple and Fact

[Round Mound]

A few things, from an unbiased PoV.

Barkley played like a small forward. But he was strong and a great rebounder/leaper so he could play power forward. Although he didn't really guard any position at an above average level.

Malone was a prototypical 4. He was phenomonal at accumulating points. He actually also had great passing and ball handling skills in general. He was a good rebounder. As his career matured his defence became extremely good. Elite. All great fundamentals and below the rim type D.

At their absolute peak, Barkley was a better player. But not by much.

As a career, Malone sh!ts on Barkley. Malone worked his a$$ to the bone to stay in shape and not miss games.
Charles got injuries, and being out of shape did not help this. Karl was twice as professional as Barkley.
Malone also had a bearable personality and was compatible with team mates. which helps. Charles was a jerk and probably still is. Malone had his troubles as a teenager, but he grew older as he matured. Barkley is still a kid to this day.

I'd draft Malone over him knowing how these people progressed.

Barkley was a Better Total Player than Malone none of this Longevity crap again .

Barkley when both where healthy and prime not Only Outplayed Him But Had a Higher PER, EFF, Plus/Minus, Shot Made/Missed Diferential, OWS, WS, WS Per 48 Minutes

Its only from 1995-96 on that Malone was Better and thats when they where closing on 33 years old.

So Barkley was Better for 80% of his Career which was shorter than Malones because he had worked so hard with nobodies from 86-92 while Malone had a The Top Shot Blokcer and Rim Protector (who could also Rebound 8-9 per game) in Eaton and was part of a System Designed by Sloan and Run By Stockton to Score easy buckets with the GOAT Pure Creator Ever.

Barkley was constatly bac kinjured like Bird and destroyed his knees 97 on.

So who gives a **** if he was lazier. He was a Stud and was just Better.

You say Malone was Mature? He knocked up a Teen Ager and Never Was There For His Baby Girl for Years.

Charles is funny becaus he always was and also he was hated more than Malone because he was smaller, talked trash and backed up. Malone never did back up anything because he fell shorter in big games

Charles Barkley was a Total Better Player than Karl. He could Do Morte Things and Dominated.

Malone shot 50% TWICE for His 19 Year Play-Off Career in the Play-offs. And a Total of 46%: SF or Guard Efficiency while Barkley dominated Play-Off Games on his OWN.

Are We Going to Act that when Bryant Retires he will Go Past MJ as a Total Point Player for Longevity?

Was He Better? NEVER!

Same thing with Charles vs Malone. Malone had longevity Barkle has the Better Resume Per Game and was Clutcher in the Play-Offs.

[Smoke117]

This one thred saying Malone > Barkley has to be one of the funniest threads ever

No way Malone was Better. He was never as Efficient Scorer, Post Season Clutch Player or Over All Around Player Barkley was

If you wan`t to do a Head to Head Analysis then do it when Barkley was healthy that is till 1995

Finally there are also the numbers from the [COLOR="Blue"]1985-86 season in favor or Barkley but here is the one that destroyed Malone hommers[/COLOR].

[COLOR="blue"]BARKLEY [/COLOR]VS [COLOR="Navy"]MALONE[/COLOR] ([COLOR="DarkRed"]PRIMES[/COLOR])

http://www.basketball-reference.com/...malonka01.html

[COLOR="Blue"]Ages 23 to 32: Seasons 1986-87 to 1995-96 as Focal Scorers and Players.

Total of 26 Games: ages 23 to 32[/COLOR]

[COLOR="DarkRed"]They Played 11 More Games: ages 33-36: When Barkley Was a Role Player, 2nd Fiddle and 2nd-3rd Scoring Option[/COLOR]

[COLOR="darkred"]*Excluding the 1985-86 Season because the Stats aren`t found for that season: both Barkley and Malone where age 22[/COLOR]
*BTW Barkley and Malone are te same age:

Malone came to the NBA at age 22 (1985-86)
Barkley came to the NBA At age 21 (1984-85)

[COLOR="darkred"]*Including Barkley`s Injury In 1993-94 and the fact he was set to retire after the 1994-95 season.[/COLOR]

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Time Played:

[COLOR="Blue"]Barkley

966 MPG/ 26 games

37.2 MPG[/COLOR]

[COLOR="Navy"]Malone

983 MPG /26 games

37.8 MPG[/COLOR]

[COLOR="DarkRed"]*Malone Played More[/COLOR]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scoring Efficiency

[COLOR="blue"]Charles Barkley

204 FGs / 399 FGAs
594 Pts / 26

22.8 PPG

(15.3 FGAs PG *Shooting Less)

51.13% FG[/COLOR]


[COLOR="Navy"]Karl Malone

231 FGs / 465 FGAs
645 Pts/ 26 games

24.8 PPG

(17.9 FGAs PG *Shooting More)

49.67% FG[/COLOR]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[COLOR="DarkRed"]*Including 2-Point FG% (A PFs Inside Scoring Efficiency Job)[/COLOR]


[COLOR="blue"]Barkley: 67 Three-Point FGAs
Barkley: 20 Three-Point FGs

Barkley: 399 - 67 = 332 Two-Point FGAs
Barkley: 204 - 20 = 184 Two-Point FGs[/COLOR]

[COLOR="Blue"]Barkley Shot: 55.42% Two-Point FG against Malone[/COLOR]

[COLOR="navy"]Malone: 15 Three-Point FGAs
Maloe: 4 Three Point FGs[/COLOR]

[COLOR="Navy"]Malone

465 - 15 = 450 Two Point FGAs
231 - 4 = 227 Two-Point FGs

Malone Shot 50.44% Two-Point FG against Barkley[/COLOR]

[COLOR="darkred"]*Barkley Shot 5% Better than Malone Inside. That`s like a Player Shooting 45% against one and the other Shooting 50% against that one....

*Malone Played More and Shot Less Effective

*Malone had THE GREATEST PASSER AND GAME CREATING POINT GUARD to DESIGN HIS SCORING - JOHN STOCKTON [/COLOR]

[COLOR="Blue"]Barkley was the Superior Scorer against Malone[/COLOR]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rebounding:

[COLOR="Blue"]Barkley

262 / 26 games

10.1 RPG [/COLOR]

[COLOR="Navy"]Malone

248 / 26 games

9.5 RPG [/COLOR]

[COLOR="Blue"]Barkley was the Superior Rebounder against Malone[/COLOR]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assists:

[COLOR="Blue"]Barkley

105 / 26 games

4.0 APG[/COLOR]

[COLOR="Navy"]Malone

70 / 26 games

2.7 APG [/COLOR]

*[COLOR="Blue"]Barkely was the Way Better Assiter than Malone[/COLOR] and [COLOR="DarkRed"] Not To Forget Barkley was Doubled More than Malone[/COLOR]

*Barkley was Also the Better Game Creator because he had to [COLOR="Blue"]BE THE SECOND LEAD GAME CREATOR [/COLOR] after his Point Guard for Most of his Prime

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Blocks:

[COLOR="Blue"]Barkley

16 / 26 games

0.62 BPG[/COLOR]

[COLOR="Navy"]Malone

20 / 26 games

0.77 BPG[/COLOR]

[COLOR="DarkRed"]*Malone Blocked Better than Barkley when facing him but we all know who was the Better Shot Blocker (Barkley)

*Not to Forget Karl Malone Had Way Better Defensive Help with Thurl Baily (could guard SFs and PFs, was quick-athletic-agil) and ofcourse

THEE BEST INTERIOR DEFENDER AND SHOT BLOCKER AND OVERAL ONE OF THE BEST DEFENDERS IN THE LATE 80s-EARLY 90s:

MARK EATON for ......PAINT DEFENDING HELP[/COLOR]

http://www.basketball-reference.com/...eatonma01.html

Defensive Rating

[COLOR="navy"]1982-83 NBA 97.8 (10)
1984-85 NBA 96.5 (1)
1985-86 NBA 100.0 (5)
1986-87 NBA 100.2 (2)
1987-88 NBA 100.7 (2)
1988-89 NBA 97.7 (2)
1989-90 NBA 102.4 (9)
1991-92 NBA 102.5 (10)[/COLOR]


Blocks Per Game

[COLOR="navy"]1982-83 NBA 3.4 (3)
1983-84 NBA 4.3 (1)
1984-85 NBA 5.6 (1)
1985-86 NBA 4.6 (2)
1986-87 NBA 4.1 (1)
1987-88 NBA 3.7 (1)
1988-89 NBA 3.8 (2)
1989-90 NBA 2.5 (6)
1990-91 NBA 2.4 (7)
1991-92 NBA 2.5 (9)
Career NBA 3.5 (1)
Career 3.5 (1)[/COLOR]

Block Pct

[COLOR="navy"]1982-83 NBA 9.2 (1)
1983-84 NBA 8.5 (1)
1984-85 NBA 8.7 (1)
1985-86 NBA 8.1 (2)
1986-87 NBA 7.4 (2)
1987-88 NBA 6.4 (3)
1988-89 NBA 6.5 (2)
1989-90 NBA 5.5 (6)
1991-92 NBA 6.2 (4)
Career NBA 6.9 (5)
Career 6.9 (5)[/COLOR]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Steals:

[COLOR="Blue"]Barkley

44/ 26 games

SPG: 1.7 SPG[/COLOR]

[COLOR="Navy"]Malone

34/ 26 games

1.3 SPG[/COLOR]

[COLOR="Blue"]*Barkley was the Better Floor Defender than Malone and Yes We Know Who Was the Better Stealer (Barkley)[/COLOR]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Turn Overs:

[COLOR="Blue"]Barkley

89/26

3.4 TOV PG[/COLOR]

[COLOR="Navy"]Malone

78/ 26

3.0 TOV PG[/COLOR]

[COLOR="DarkRed"]*Ofcourse Malone had Less Turn Overs...His Job Was to Wait for Stockton to Design Him the Pick and Roll or Fast Break Pass while he had to do ZERO GAME CREATING with THE BEST PASSER OF ALL TIME LEADING, a SG and a SF that Had THE SECOND AND THIRD GAME CREATING JOB[/COLOR]

[COLOR="DarkRed"]*Barkley`s Job Was To Do Everything from The PF Spot from 1986 to 1992[/COLOR]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Personal Fouls:

[COLOR="Blue"]Barkley

95/26 games

3.7 PF[/COLOR]

[COLOR="Navy"]Malone

93/26 games

3.6 PF[/COLOR]

[COLOR="darkred"]*Barkley fouled a bit more but obviously Malone never had to Guard Barkley as much as he had to Guard him because BARKLEY WAS A MISSMATCH so there was usually 3 PLAYERS ROTATING ON HIM, including Malone

*It was to Prevent Karl Malone (Their Best Scorer, Rebounder and One of the Best Defenders) from Fouling Out [/COLOR]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FT Shooting:


[COLOR="Blue"]*Barkley had the Edge FT Shooting against Malone but We All Know Who Was the Better FT Shooter (Malone)[/COLOR]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[COLOR="Blue"]Dedicated to All Those Idiots Who Base The Head to Head Matchups After Their Primes from Ages 33-36: after Barkley left to Houston as a 2nd-3rd Focal Scorer and 2nd Fiddle with a Dead Back (Like Bird), Knee Injuries and Overweight...

Insead of Their Primes ages 23-32 (missing ages 22) [/COLOR]

[COLOR="Red"]DON`T EVER UNDERRATE BARKLEY AGAIN![/COLOR]

I'm sure you think so. You're not a particularly bad poster RoundMound but when it comes to Charles Barkley someone could come up with the most rational legitimate argument and you would debunk it when it comes to Chuck so what is really the point?

[RRR3]

Barkley was a Better Total Player than Malone none of this Longevity crap again .

Barkley when both where healthy and prime not Only Outplayed Him But Had a Higher PER, EFF, Plus/Minus, [COLOR="Blue"]Shot Made/Missed Diferential[/COLOR], OWS, WS, WS Per 48 Minutes

Its only from 1995-96 on that Malone was Better and thats when they where closing on 33 years old.

So Barkley was Better for 80% of his Career which was shorter than Malones because he had worked so hard with nobodies from 86-92 while Malone had a The Top Shot Blokcer and Rim Protector (who could also Rebound 8-9 per game) in Eaton and was part of a System Designed by Sloan and Run By Stockton to Score easy buckets with the GOAT Pure Creator Ever.

Barkley was constatly bac kinjured like Bird and destroyed his knees 97 on.

So who gives a **** if he was lazier. He was a Stud and was just Better.

You say Malone was Mature? He knocked up a Teen Ager and Never Was There For His Baby Girl for Years.

Charles is funny becaus he always was and also he was hated more than Malone because he was smaller, talked trash and backed up. Malone never did back up anything because he fell shorter in big games

Charles Barkley was a Total Better Player than Karl. He could Do Morte Things and Dominated.

Malone shot 50% TWICE for His 19 Year Play-Off Career in the Play-offs. And a Total of 46%: SF or Guard Efficiency while Barkley dominated Play-Off Games on his OWN.

Are We Going to Act that when Bryant Retires he will Go Past MJ as a Total Point Player for Longevity?

Was He Better? NEVER!

Same thing with Charles vs Malone. Malone had longevity Barkle has the Better Resume Per Game and was Clutcher in the Play-Offs.

What the hell that's not even a stat

[Round Mound]

I'm sure you think so. You're not a particularly bad poster RoundMound but when it comes to Charles Barkley someone could come up with the most rational legitimate argument and you would debunk it when it comes to Chuck so what is really the point?

I am rational enough because i was also a Malone fan when young but i did see them before 1996-97 and Barkley was Better. Even Better in his Phily Days.

I just find info that prooves who was the more dominant and efficient player

Thats All ...Greetings

[Reggie43]

Barkley was a Better Total Player than Malone none of this Longevity crap again .

Barkley when both where healthy and prime not Only Outplayed Him But Had a Higher PER, EFF, Plus/Minus, Shot Made/Missed Diferential, OWS, WS, WS Per 48 Minutes

Its only from 1995-96 on that Malone was Better and thats when they where closing on 33 years old.

So Barkley was Better for 80% of his Career which was shorter than Malones because he had worked so hard with nobodies from 86-92 while Malone had a The Top Shot Blokcer and Rim Protector (who could also Rebound 8-9 per game) in Eaton and was part of a System Designed by Sloan and Run By Stockton to Score easy buckets with the GOAT Pure Creator Ever.

Barkley was constatly bac kinjured like Bird and destroyed his knees 97 on.

So who gives a **** if he was lazier. He was a Stud and was just Better.

You say Malone was Mature? He knocked up a Teen Ager and Never Was There For His Baby Girl for Years.

Charles is funny becaus he always was and also he was hated more than Malone because he was smaller, talked trash and backed up. Malone never did back up anything because he fell shorter in big games

Charles Barkley was a Total Better Player than Karl. He could Do Morte Things and Dominated.

Malone shot 50% TWICE for His 19 Year Play-Off Career in the Play-offs. And a Total of 46%: SF or Guard Efficiency while Barkley dominated Play-Off Games on his OWN.

Are We Going to Act that when Bryant Retires he will Go Past MJ as a Total Point Player for Longevity?

Was He Better? NEVER!

Same thing with Charles vs Malone. Malone had longevity Barkle has the Better Resume Per Game and was Clutcher in the Play-Offs.

So you think that the difference between Charles and Karl is the same as the difference between Michael and Kobe?

[Round Mound]

So you think that the difference between Charles and Karl is the same as the difference between Michael and Kobe?

From 85-95 it was a difference easy to see not the largest but visible. After that it was Malone`s Turn and Barkley couldnt play like before sadly.

Michael and Kobe? Skill Wise Not So Much but it was MJ`s Athletic Capacity, Strength, Able to Hang, Potence, Leap, Agility, Big Hands and Quickness thats sets him apart from MJ especially for Mid Range Post Up Shots, Attacking the Rim and Defense where Jordan was much Better at.

[Reggie43]

A few things, from an unbiased PoV.

Barkley played like a small forward. But he was strong and a great rebounder/leaper so he could play power forward. Although he didn't really guard any position at an above average level.

Malone was a prototypical 4. He was phenomonal at accumulating points. He actually also had great passing and ball handling skills in general. He was a good rebounder. As his career matured his defence became extremely good. Elite. All great fundamentals and below the rim type D.

At their absolute peak, Barkley was a better player. But not by much.

As a career, Malone sh!ts on Barkley. Malone worked his a$$ to the bone to stay in shape and not miss games.
Charles got injuries, and being out of shape did not help this. Karl was twice as professional as Barkley.
Malone also had a bearable personality and was compatible with team mates. which helps. Charles was a jerk and probably still is. Malone had his troubles as a teenager, but he grew older as he matured. Barkley is still a kid to this day.

I'd draft Malone over him knowing how these people progressed.

Nice post

[Round Mound]

Barkley`s Offensive Game was not that of a SF but only in Terms of Catch and Finish (which Malone was the Best at) but was more a Like a Guard-Center.

He would approach you like a Guard.

Then Turn To One Side Use is Butt and Punished You to the Rim for Spins, Post Fadeways, Or Two Handed Dunks.

He could also play some SF but his Game was more in the Post

[SuperPippen]

Your posts remind me of a bag of Skittles.

[Smoke117]

I am rational enough because i was also a Malone fan when young but i did see them before 1996-97 and Barkley was Better. Even Better in his Phily Days.

I just find info that prooves who was the more dominant and efficient player

Thats All ...Greetings

Yeah, you are the picture of objectively bud, keep telling yourself that.

[knickswin]

Barkley`s Offensive Game was not that of a SF but only in Terms of Catch and Finish (which Malone was the Best at) but was more a Like a Guard-Center.

He would approach you like a Guard.

Then Turn To One Side Use is Butt and Punished You to the Rim for Spins, Post Fadeways, Or Two Handed Dunks.

He could also play some SF but his Game was more in the Post

Yeah, Barkley definitely played big in some ways and small in others. He was a beast in the post, but he also had very good handle for a PF. I would say that Barkley played more like a "big man" than Malone did because he was so much better at getting his through post-ups.