Karl Malone vs Charles Barkley
Moderators: Clyde Frazier, Doctor MJ, trex_8063, penbeast0, PaulieWal
-
Harry Palmer
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 42,776
- And1: 6,195
- Joined: Sep 16, 2004
- Location: It’s all a bit vague.
-
Point forward
- Head Coach
- Posts: 6,200
- And1: 285
- Joined: May 16, 2007
- Location: Eating crow for the rest of my life :D
-
conleyorbust
- Lead Assistant
- Posts: 4,837
- And1: 0
- Joined: May 24, 2007
Ignore the stats on this one. Chuck was straight dominant out there. Just watching him play the game, he was unstoppable on his own.
Watching Malone, well there is really no better way to explain it than saying that you were watching one half of the greatest PnR combo of all time.
At basketball, I'd say chuck by a little.
A not being a complete ****, I'd say Chuck by quite a bit.
Watching Malone, well there is really no better way to explain it than saying that you were watching one half of the greatest PnR combo of all time.
At basketball, I'd say chuck by a little.
A not being a complete ****, I'd say Chuck by quite a bit.
-
tsherkin
- Forum Mod - Raptors
- Posts: 92,223
- And1: 31,807
- Joined: Oct 14, 2003
-
I have to go with Malone, here.
Malone's playoff performance hit is a bit overrated given the nature of his team (him, Stockton and a bunch of unathletic shooters and defenders, mainly)... Malone may have "not delivered" on Sundays but Utah was generally possessed of one of the crappier supporting casts in the league, buoyed primarily by how awesome Malone and Stockton were. He delivered well enough to help the Jazz to the playoffs every year he was there and ten trips past the first round (5 to the WCFs, 2 to the Finals), which is also pretty outstanding.
Lest we forget, Barkley took a 3% hit to his FG% come playoff-time as well which, while not as large as Malone's (~5%), is still fairly noticeable. Those of us counting might remember that the Jazz did defeat the Rockets in consecutive postseasons while Barkley was in Houston.
In their first matchup, he managed a tremendous 16.12 ppg on 42.9% shooting against Malone; he rebounded well (11 rpg) but he did not perform well offensively and that is his major claim against Karl.
Malone slightly outrebounded Barkley (11.5 rpg). He scored more, but he was also taking more shots per game... he still shot better (about 2% better at 44.8%), so that's something.
In '98, Sir Charles was coming off the bench, so the numbers don't really do much justice to the matchup. Suffice it to say, he peaked at 12 points, didn't get into double digits on the glass and I don't think he played in Game 6 at all.
I mean, you're talking about head-to-head here, right? Malone's playoff track record speaks for itself in comparison to Barkley's.
Barkley made it out of the first round four times with the Sixers (making it to the ECFs once), then three more times with Phoenix (making it out of the second round once, when they made the Finals in '93) and then had a short career with the Rockets where he made it to the Conference Finals (where he was beaten by Malone's Jazz) once and then made consecutive first-round appearances before missing the playoffs for the second time in his career (though by this point, he was forced into retirement due to injury and had been degenerating significantly for several years due to poor treatment of his body, mostly).
Barkley was scarier as a scorer in a way, even though he wasn't actually a higher-volume guy; he was more efficient, more explosive, less predictable, more athletic and more exciting but Malone was like the inexorable hand of time, he was always going to do something and he might do it on defense, which Barkley rarely did.
I'd tend to prefer to have Malone on my team and then not crap the bed as far as adding a significant second scoring weapon alongside him. Hornacek and Stockton do not count. By the time the Jazz were really getting good, they were really old and unathletic and found it very difficult to compete against the Chicago defense because it was such a tight rotational defense and they had so few isolation scorers that there was almost nothing to be done. They relied so heavily on Malone to score because they didn't have anyone else who could do it.
Hornacek choked in the Finals in consecutive seasons which really killed Utah's chance to win; you think the steal at the end of Game 6 in '98 was the deciding factor in that series? It's a freaking miracle it GOT to Game 6 both years.
Malone's playoff performance hit is a bit overrated given the nature of his team (him, Stockton and a bunch of unathletic shooters and defenders, mainly)... Malone may have "not delivered" on Sundays but Utah was generally possessed of one of the crappier supporting casts in the league, buoyed primarily by how awesome Malone and Stockton were. He delivered well enough to help the Jazz to the playoffs every year he was there and ten trips past the first round (5 to the WCFs, 2 to the Finals), which is also pretty outstanding.
Lest we forget, Barkley took a 3% hit to his FG% come playoff-time as well which, while not as large as Malone's (~5%), is still fairly noticeable. Those of us counting might remember that the Jazz did defeat the Rockets in consecutive postseasons while Barkley was in Houston.
In their first matchup, he managed a tremendous 16.12 ppg on 42.9% shooting against Malone; he rebounded well (11 rpg) but he did not perform well offensively and that is his major claim against Karl.
Malone slightly outrebounded Barkley (11.5 rpg). He scored more, but he was also taking more shots per game... he still shot better (about 2% better at 44.8%), so that's something.
In '98, Sir Charles was coming off the bench, so the numbers don't really do much justice to the matchup. Suffice it to say, he peaked at 12 points, didn't get into double digits on the glass and I don't think he played in Game 6 at all.
I mean, you're talking about head-to-head here, right? Malone's playoff track record speaks for itself in comparison to Barkley's.
Barkley made it out of the first round four times with the Sixers (making it to the ECFs once), then three more times with Phoenix (making it out of the second round once, when they made the Finals in '93) and then had a short career with the Rockets where he made it to the Conference Finals (where he was beaten by Malone's Jazz) once and then made consecutive first-round appearances before missing the playoffs for the second time in his career (though by this point, he was forced into retirement due to injury and had been degenerating significantly for several years due to poor treatment of his body, mostly).
Barkley was scarier as a scorer in a way, even though he wasn't actually a higher-volume guy; he was more efficient, more explosive, less predictable, more athletic and more exciting but Malone was like the inexorable hand of time, he was always going to do something and he might do it on defense, which Barkley rarely did.
I'd tend to prefer to have Malone on my team and then not crap the bed as far as adding a significant second scoring weapon alongside him. Hornacek and Stockton do not count. By the time the Jazz were really getting good, they were really old and unathletic and found it very difficult to compete against the Chicago defense because it was such a tight rotational defense and they had so few isolation scorers that there was almost nothing to be done. They relied so heavily on Malone to score because they didn't have anyone else who could do it.
Hornacek choked in the Finals in consecutive seasons which really killed Utah's chance to win; you think the steal at the end of Game 6 in '98 was the deciding factor in that series? It's a freaking miracle it GOT to Game 6 both years.