Is Rick Barry underrated?

[andykeikei]

Is he underrated? Is Dr. J really better than him?
To quote from wiki: "Barry averaged 30.6 points per game, led the league in free throw percentage (.904) and steals per game (2.9) and ranked sixth in assists per game (6.2), he was somewhat overlooked in the Most Valuable Player vote."

Compared to Dr. J,
Barry was as good, if not better as a scorer. He was also a better playmaker, may be ball handler too.
Dr. J was a better shotblocker and help defender, but I think Barry was not bad either. I wonder if most people rate Dr. J higher because of the way he played and he was the symbol of the league. Barry was never popular, people hate him, and may be that's why he is so underrated?

What's your opinion on him?

[joew8302]

Yes, he was underrated but that is partly his own fault. He was not very accommodating to the media which painted a negative image of him.

[ChargerMan]

He was a jerkoff, I remember Daryll Dawkins book and he had some words for the Barry man

[Red Robot]

I don't think his skills compare favorably to dr J's. He was not as efficient a scorer, nor as good a playmaker, defender, or rebounder. It's tempting to lump him in with the volume players, but...

In a way, I do think Barry is underrated. His teams were successful his entire career. He finished below .500 only twice--once as a rookie and once in the ABA. He won a title as the centerpiece of his team ('75), and also made the finals a second time as a main option ('67), albeit in a weak conference. He routinely made it deep into the playoffs and starred on arguably the best team to never make the playoffs.

His game and his personality might be hard to like, but there's no denying that something he did was effective. I don't know if it would be today, but it was in the 70s.

[TheOUTLAW]

He was a very good player, but he wasn't as good as Dr. J.

[TrueLAfan]

I think it depends on where you rate him...if you think Rick Barry wasn't a great basketball player then, yes, he's underrated. The story about Rick Barry getting “overlooked” by MVP voters in 1975 (or any year) is largely a myth. Sure, Barry had a terrific season in 1975. So did Bob McAdoo. So did Elvin Hayes. So did Dave Cowens. So did Kareem. Barry finished a close fourth that season.

Code: Select all

1974-5    PPG   RPG   APG  FG%   FT%   STL  BLK    MVP Points
McAdoo    34.5  14.1  2.2  .512  .805  1.1  2.2       547
Cowens    20.4  14.7  4.6  .475  .783  1.3  1.1       310
Hayes     23.0  12.2  2.5  .443  .766  1.9  2.3       289
Barry     30.6   5.7  6.2  .464  .904  2.9  0.4       254
Kareem    30.0  14.0  4.1  .513  .763  1.0  3.3       161


So Barry wasn't “overlooked”...he just didn't win. Personally, I think Cowens got a little extra push because of the subtle racial (disguised as Anti-ABA) bias, and that Kareem got shafted because he only played 65 games and everyone was already tired of giving him the award. In short, the idea that Rick Barry got shafted in 1975 is wrong...he was fourth in a closely contested contest to guys that, for the most part, had far better defensive games than he did.

Other thoughts. First, Rick Barry was actually a pretty mediocre defender. He got a decent amount of steals; that does not equate to good defense. As he got older, Barry played pretty far off opposing players on D--he didn't have the quicks to stay with most SFs once he was 30. He was sort of the anti-Hondo in that regard. Overall on D, I'd put him a bit below, say, Nique.

Compared to Julius Erving...Barry scored a bit more, and got more assists. But he was more of a black hole too...and he was not nearly as efficient. Considerably poorer shooting from the field. And Barry's great FT% has less meaning when you go the line 30-40% less. Rebounding and defense are not close. Neither is the biggest difference—intangibles. Barry was almost universally disliked. He had the one championship in a lousy league year...but most of Barry's teams were around .500. (He only finished under .500 twice...but in seasons where Barry played at least half the season, he was only on one 50 win team.) Dr. J's teams did better and Dr. J made them better; he was a much better teammate and team player.

[penbeast0]

Barry is underrated here and in contest like the ATL because his main skill, shooting the long range 2, was superceded by the 3 point line. Barry was one of the great long ball shooters of the pre-3 point era. He didn't drive the lane that much and so didn't draw many fouls and with the 3 point line being non-existent when he learned the game and through much of his career (and disliked by most coaches even when it esisted), he didn't get the huge efficiency boost that players like Ray Allen or Reggie Miller did for similar games. And yes, he was not a good defender or a well liked teammate.

But the long range shooter was an essential part of the game; without it, defenses packed down on the post men. Guys like Barry or Hal Greer created space for the post scorers that most teams built around, or the slashers, or even the short midrange shooters like teammates Jamaal Wilkes and Phil Smith. Every team needed guys like that and none of those guys get a lot of respect today (Bill Bradley, Jack Marin, Barry, John Johnson, Mike Mitchell, etc. etc.) because their efficiency stats don't measure up to the guys that had slashing or post games like a Bernard King or even Dominique Wilkins.

[andykeikei]

Thanks for your replies. They are all very interesting posts. May be I went too far by comparing Barry to Dr. J.

However, if the 3 point line is implemented earlier, do you think those guys that penbeast0 mentioned would have got more recognition?

After I analysis some of the games and stats from the 50's and 60's, I understand why players shot at a lower percentage compare to now. I admitted that there were some laughable shot selections, even guys like Jerry West and Sam Jones, who were among the best shooting guards ever; put up horrific shots like off balance-1 leg-fadeaway jumper...but I understand now why they did it now.

It was because there was no 3 point line. No matter how far you shoot the ball, it's a 2. Why bother go out and let the shooter get an easier shot? I would rather sit at home and let him shoot the uncontest long jumper. Basically, that's why people packed the painted at that time and it was very hard for a guard to slash inside and score; that's why guards liked to throw up some quick shots before the D had settled.