Doctor MJ wrote:
Hmm, well I guess the main thing is it just seems out of the blue all of this venom against them.
Well, I'll give him this, at least they appear to be fresh in his mind to an extent.
Most people don't even remember the Suns outside 93.
Problem I have is that people get down on Barkley for losing a seven game series by a point -- while playing pretty banged up near the end, mind you -- while David Robinson is given a free pass on another matchup meltdown due to his team's regular season.
The half and half argument, where Robinson's only responsible for the good portion of the ledger, doesn't work for me.
The two are great counterexamples of my overall point: Barkley arguably played a nice series and had a valiant effort in game 7, while Robinson had a 6 game series that was nothing less and nothing more than a one on one matchup deciding the series against his team.
That is, one is far more responsible for the loss than the other. I do think people simplify winning and losing, in that we have the idea that Shaq's series against Olajuwon is a greater mark against him, because he was swept, than Robinson's latest playoff disaster is against him, simply because Robinson's team lasted longer.
To be sure, like everything else, that should be considered. But I don't find it easy, or logical, to say that Shaq was more responsible for his team's sweep than Robinson was for his team's 6 gamer.
As an addendum, the mark I would make against Barkley is in regards to his conditioning.
I don't know if that's fair, but I suspect he started to have these problems, when he did, because he didn't care enough in that area.
One other thing I will say is this whole "choking" thing. I mean you just used the fact that they kept WINNING elimination games as proof that they choked.
I find it odd as well.
I'd say he has a valid point about underachievement, especially looking at the talent level (between teams that over and underachieve, based on roster depth, I'd say the early-mid 90s Suns are the latter), but choking can be a rather vague precedent.
Did the Rockets choke because they went down three-one? Or is that not possible for them, because of their record?
But that returns to an argument and follow-through of underachievement leading to the conclusion of choking, right?
Did the Rockets overachieve in the playoffs, or massively underachieve during the season?
The Drexler trade made that season for them.
That's so strange. I will agree though that the Suns to me weren't a team whose talent ever meshed as well as you'd like. They seemed to withstand injuries to Barkley and KJ remarkably well, but never transcended to jawdropping levels when everyone was together.
You can see this point in the Suns/Rockets series.
The Suns had trouble getting a consistently combined output from KJ and Barkley. They got it three times.
Four times they didn't.
The question is, do they get it if Westphal doesn't freeze Barkley out in game 7? Do they get it if Barkley's leg holds up?
KJ and Barkley, in the yin/yang, complement department, were the anti-Stockton-to-Malone, right down to roster depth beyond the two stars.
Wasted talent, particularly when you look at how good that roster was in 95 (though Manning was a blow).
