lets be honest.. enough debating between Malone and Barkley. neither are 2nd best PF

[Bandito]

Damn, Kenny looking knowledgeable.

he doesn't talk about Kobe or hate against Lebron and he's suddenly knowledgeable. LEBRON STAN logic...

[Nastradamus]

Its too bad. You can make a decent case for KG, but all the stupid shit the OP said about Barkley and Malone really makes his points moot.

[Pointguard]

Pierce was at his absolute peak with KG (he was FINALS MVP for f*cksakes) and Allen was an All Star too.

When comparatively non athletic guys get on the otherside of thirty and are on the wings, they are past their peak. Pierce wasn't going to get anymore years of like his three years of 26ppg. He was still good but not at his peak.

Him winning the FMVP had more to do with his acting skills and not that he was the best player out there.

They were called the BIG THREE for a reason, because it was thought to be unfair that three transcendent stars should play together.

And Rondo played almost his whole career with KG so which part of his prime am I missing?

As I have said before, Barkley was washed up in Houston. Done, finished.

You are never washed up and done if you are getting 13.5 rebounds per game (his second highest ever and his second highest assist season, which means Barkley had the energy. He shouldn't have been washed up at 33 with his body. Paul Pierce and Ray Allen were not on the level of Hakeem/Drexler or Doc/Malone/Cheeks/Toney. Not hardly.

Rondo is just entering his prime now.

[Pointguard]

What?

Pierce and Allen were still all-star, elite players at their position from 2008 - 2012. Ray Allen friggin had his best playoff performance ever in 2009 when he dropped a sick 50 on my Bulls.

Rondo by 2009 had emerged as one of the game's best PGs, particularly when it comes to playoff performance. He raises his game. KG had him as an elite PG from 2010 - 2012.

Don't make stuff up, usually you're on point though.

Maybe you might consider looking at what prime means?

Can you be stellar when not in your prime?

Jordan on the Wizards scored 50 points - was he in his prime?

In general the athletes body matches its minds optimal intelligence and co-ordination along with very good endurance/flexibility and strength best in the ages 26 thru 30. Not all primes are the same but maximum performance is usually in that range in basketball (most sports) with bigger guys peaking later if their game is skilled and the smaller positions hit their prime earlier. Super gifted players are a little different and sometimes become more skilled which confuses things. But I was talking physical prime.

Being the best PG has nothing to do with Rondo's prime which should be in the next 4 years. My understanding is that he needs some growing up mentally but all point guards are still in training before 25.

Ray Allen was a very impressive athlete in his earlier years. But is now rarely using that aspect of his game because he's using his skill much more.

[2LeTTeRS]

Last time I checked, 'tail end of their prime' is still THEIR PRIME? Am I right? Gimme an A-Men!

When you win the title and FMVP, it is safe to assume you are at your peak (especially considering these are the only times you won these trophies).

Barkley was actually at the 'tail end of his prime' in Phoenix, and washed up in Houston.

What happens in the twilight of a players career matters. You can't just ignore KG's contributions with the Celtics (and Nets) or ignore the fact that Barkley's bad habits were the largest factor contributing him to be "washed up" prematurely. This isn't solely a case of bad luck like with Bird; this is a guy who did not take great care of his body and as such he deserves the criticism for it failing on him when he had his best chance to win a title.

All the haters arguments are VS Houston Charles. It is like trying to besmirch Jordan for what happened in Washington.

From when Bird and Magic slowed down till Hakeem took it to the next level (basically from 88-94) Barkley was second only to Jordan in the league, only Duncan ranks higher than him in the all time PF list. KG cannot say this about his career, nor can Malone.

Magic slowed down in 88? You do realize he put up 22 points, 12 assists and 8 rebounds on a team that made it to the Finals in 89 and followed that up with a 22, 11 and 6 season while winning 63 games? He was definitely better than Barkley for those 2 years; and possibly in 91 as well when he led the Lakers to the Finals.

Additionally because of his bigger personality Barkley may have been regarded as better than Hakeem, David Robinson, and Patrick Ewing; but all of those bigs were just as productive as Barkley while being worlds better on D.

Barkley
89 - 79 games 26 pts 13 rebs with 1 blks and 2 stls [46 wins | Lost to Knicks in 1st round]
90 - 79 games 25 pts 12 rebs with 1 blks and 2 stls [53 wins | Lost to Bulls in ECS]
91 - 67 games 28 pts 10 rebs with .5 blks and 2 stls [44 wins | Lost to Bulls in ECS]
92 - 75 games 23 pts 11 rebs with 1 blks and 2 stls [35 wins | NO PLAYOFFS]
93 - 76 games 26 pts 12 rebs with 1 blks and 2 stls [62 wins | Lost to Bulls in Finals]
94 - 65 games 22 pts 11 rebs with .6 blks and 2 stls [56 wins | Lost to Rockets in WCS]

vs.

Hakeem
89 - 82 games 25 pts 14 rebs with 3 blks and 2.6 stls [45 wins | Lost to Sonics in 1st Round]
90 - 82 games 24 pts 14 rebs with 5 blks and 2 stls [41 wins | Lost to Lakers in 1st Round]
91 - 56 games 21 pts 14 rebs with 4 blks and 2 stls [52 wins | Lost to Lakers in 1st Round]
92 - 70 games 21 pts 12 rebs with 4 blks and 2 stls [42 wins | NO PLAYOFFS]
93 - 82 games 26 pts 13 rebs with 4 blks and 2 stls [55 wins | Lost to Sonics in WCS]
94 - 80 games 27 pts 12 rebs with 4 blks and 1.6 stls [58 wins | WON TITLE]

D Rob
90 - 82 games 24 pts 12 rebs with 4 blks and 2 stls [56 wins | Lost to Blazers in WCS]
91 - 82 games 26 pts 13 rebs with 4 blks and 2 stls [55 wins | Lost to Warriors in 1st Round]
92 - 68 games 23 pts 12 rebs with 4.5 blks and 2 stls [47 wins | Lost to Suns in 1st Round]
93 - 82 games 23 pts 12 rebs with 3 blks and 1.5 stls [49 wins | Lost to Suns in WCS]
94 - 80 games 30 pts 11 rebs with 3 blks and 2 stls [55 wins | Lost to Jazz in 1st Round]

Ewing
89 - 80 games 23 pts 9 rebs with 3.5 blks and 1.5 stls [52 wins | Lost to Bulls in ECS]
90 - 82 games 29 pts 11 rebs with 4 blks and 1 stls [45 wins | Lost to Pistons in ECS]
91 - 81 games 27 pts 11 rebs with 3 blks and 1 stls [39 wins | Lost to Bulls in 1st Round]
92 - 82 games 24 pts 11 rebs with 3 blks and 1 stls [51 wins | Lost to Bulls in ECS]
93 - 81 games 24 pts 12 rebs with 2 blks and 1 stls [60 wins | Lost to Bulls in ECF]
94 - 79 games 25 pts 11 rebs with 3 blks and 1 stls [57 wins | Lost to Rockets in Finals]

Edit: Forgot to add Patrick Ewing

This is reality for those who lived it, those who youtube and basketball reference it don't get it.

Stop it. Barkley was the flashier player and bigger personality, but better player? Not at all. Even at his best he gave questionable effort on D, had a personality that was hard to deal with; and wouldn't do the work necessary to keep his weight down.

Not saying KG doesn't have his faults (not a dominant scorer, only above average in the post and no go-to move; slim build, etc.) he's much more well rounded than Barkley.

[Thorpesaurous]

You mean Dirk's TEAMS consistent contending? He was blessed with one of the best owners in NBA, who did his very best to build championship teams around Dirk. Swap Dirk with KG and we would probably see KG winning multiple championships with Mavs.

Spotty contending is also an interesting point, do you know KG never lost as a favorite? KG always won when he was expected to, and sometimes pulled upsets, that puts him on the very short list of superstars who never lost to underdogs, like Jordan and Russell.

Dirk on the other hand, lost many times while being favorite. Sometimes it was such meltdowns that he wasnt respected that much (until '11). After Dirk got the ring everything he did (or didnt do) till then somehow got forgotten, aside from getting credit for his perennial contending team.

Really we're all picking nits here. This as close to a four way virtual tie as one can get. I just don't like giving too much credit for what-ifs and shouldas and couldas and sposedas on a historical level. Dirk's ring to me is really more of a justification for the years of playing at the highest level with no respite, more than an apology for some mistakes. I think Patrick Ewing gets some credit similarly for basically 15 years of standing in there and throwing punches in the post season.

And for the mention that Dirk had a great owner, well if you think so highly of him, he's the same guy who's turned over roster after roster and never got rid of Dirk.

And again, personally, if I'm picking a team, I'm taking KG over Dirk, but if you're ranking historically, Dirk just did a hair more.

All of these guys actually make huge footprints on the sport too. Imagine 40 years from now your grandkids are discussing this.
Malone is by far the least interesting player on this list, and he's got a rediculous career length, and will have a stretch of time as the all time leading scorer to point too. Although the worst highlight reel. And he'll got the looks for losing to Jordan too.

Barkley probably has the least to point to, but he's going to have a rediculously long tenure as an enormous contributor as an ambassador to the sport from his television work, and his larger than life personality, along with his huge role on that first dream team. He's also got the epic playoff runs with the Suns. And will be looked at as a guy who lost to Jordan.

Dirk will have his MVP and title, which are the types things people look at. But in addition, he'll have a really nice highlight reel, along with being in the "best shooter ever" conversations. He'll have a career of playoff battles against Duncan and Kobe and Shaq and those cool Kings teams. But perhaps most importantly he'll be remembered as opening the foreign floodgates.

Garnett will have really on his one playoff run in Minnie to point too. The Celtic run will look short because of injuries. He'll probably get a lot of credit for being something of a Lebron stumbling block during his time in the east as his teams always played well against him. And he may be remembered for re-establishing the straight from HS phenom thing again, but unfortunately for him I'd guess Kobe will unfairly steal that torch from him just because he'll have a more significant career (sort of like when someone eventally says Dirk was the first guy to make an impact from Europe, and some guy will bring up Drazen Petrovic or Toni Kukoc, but it's still Dirk). He'll have some defensive accolaids and rebounding titles to point to, but not in any super gaudy way.
A second title here in Brooklyn would really help him. Especially if he beat Lebron on the way, because he'll then really be viewed through this prism as a guy who gave Lebron trouble historically.

Historical perspective is painted in really broad strokes. Not with True Shooting percentage, or roster evaluation.