Charles Barkley vs Moses Malone - for today's game

[durantbird]

Who would you prefer to build your team around for today's game - prime Barkley or Moses?

[70sFan]

Both would be fine offensively, defensively is a more interesting discussion.

[penbeast0]

Barkley is the more talented. He a better shooter, better handles, even a better interior scorer, and it's very close on rebounding. His prime was longer too though OP specified primes only; Moses played forever but his hops deserted him much faster leaving him as a far less efficient shooter. The downside is that Barkley has to play the 4, he's just too short to guard 5's. That means you can't play 4 out except for small stretches.

Moses has only two advantages. First, he is just a bigger man. Second, he works much harder on the defensive end. That and he's a professional; Barkley was something of a clown, a party boy, and liked to stir up trouble in the locker room for the fun of it (mainly from Jayson Williams's book but born out by most interviews I've heard). To build a team around during their primes, I'd take him over Barkley despite Barkley being a more talented player. The intangibles and defense are just too powerful a difference.

[kcktiny]

Barkley is the more talented.

A young Malone (<30) was relentless. There were few, ever, that played non-stop like he did, on both ends of the floor. He out-worked everybody.

Second, he works much harder on the defensive end.

I don't know why some on this board don't understand this. Moses was a very good defender, until he aged into his 30s, and did so without fouling. I remember countless battles of him against Jabbar, Gilmore, Lanier, and especially Parish.

Most on this board likely have an image of him as being heavy, like in the mid-80s. But when he was young, in the late 70s, he was thin:

Watch on YouTube

Watch on YouTube

Watch on YouTube

- yes thank you 70sFan

Watch on YouTube

Watch on YouTube

[penbeast0]

Thin might be pushing it unless you are talking about the teenaged version in Utah and ever there, I never thought of him as a Larry Nance type. But he was quick with a very high motor. And, of course, compared to young Barkley . . .

[capfan33]

Think I like Chuck more even though I do generally hate the idea of having to try and build around him defensively, but I do think a lot of his issues were related to effort, and with modern scheming and the right team around him I think he would be fine.

And offensively I love his skillset at the 4, would be a menace to deal with. With a stretch 5 he could probably power top-3 offenses annually.

[kcktiny]

I have books/magazines from the late 70s that list Malone at 6-10 and 220 lb. Those same books/magazines list him at 6-10 and 260 lb by the late 80s.

For comparison right now ESPN lists 6-6 Jaylen Brown, 6-6 Demar Derozan, and 6-6 Taurean Prince at 220 lb.

[70sFan]

Young Moses was actually worse defensively than in the mid-80s.

[70sFan]

I have books/magazines from the late 70s that list Malone at 6-10 and 220 lb. Those same books/magazines list him at 6-10 and 260 lb by the late 80s.

For comparison right now ESPN lists 6-6 Jaylen Brown, 6-6 Demar Derozan, and 6-6 Taurean Prince at 220 lb.

That's because they likely copied his rookie weight, when he was a teenager. It was a normal thing back then, look at Walt Bellamy listed weight for example.

[Owly]

Barkley is the more talented. He a better shooter, better handles, even a better interior scorer, and it's very close on rebounding. His prime was longer too though OP specified primes only; Moses played forever but his hops deserted him much faster leaving him as a far less efficient shooter. The downside is that Barkley has to play the 4, he's just too short to guard 5's. That means you can't play 4 out except for small stretches.

Moses has only two advantages. First, he is just a bigger man. Second, he works much harder on the defensive end. That and he's a professional; Barkley was something of a clown, a party boy, and liked to stir up trouble in the locker room for the fun of it (mainly from Jayson Williams's book but born out by most interviews I've heard). To build a team around during their primes, I'd take him over Barkley despite Barkley being a more talented player. The intangibles and defense are just too powerful a difference.

Barkley as a better shooter ... perhaps depends what you mean.

Barkley was definitely more efficient a scorer .. shooting for a higher percentage.

In terms of outside shots

FT% career
Moses .760
Charles .735

In the limited, early shot tracking numbers on Reference (and from what I think I've read the earlier shot tracking data is a little less reliable and '97 15ft to 3 is a shorter range) Barkley looks pretty strong from longish 2s (.439) less so on shorter midrange (10ft to 15ft: .346) with a greater number of attempts from the shorter range. He has a similar proportion of his attempts from three to those from shorter mid-rrange.

Granting that routes taken matter and attempts can open up other shots on future possessions, I'd (otoh) imagine Barkley did the most damage to his efficiency by shooting 3s and probably the most damage to his team. A career 79 3p+ is just awful and more jarring in the context of a 119 2p+ and 170FTr+ [presumably mostly not drawn on 3s]. Barkley's 3pt attempts isn't huge for today but for a 4 (earlier often called a 3) at the time it's pretty high especially for someone ... not so great at it: 2020 career RS attempts. As one possible frame of reference, Sam Perkins a forward who would latterly become a stretch 5 and somewhat of a 3pt specialist has 2348. Certainly then if shot selection is integrated into the outside shooting measure ... that really hurts Barkley.

For Malone there isn't a bunch of data (certainly not officially). More anecdotally the Barry books published in 89 and 90 refer to faceup jumper from 15 feet and in. (I feel I may have seen him shoot a touch deeper but this is probably mentally indexing on one or two individual instances so definitely defer to contemporary reporting unless and until further evidence emerges). FT% (and the Barry guides) implies that his jump shooting/outside shooting skill improved from a weakness early on and perhaps became a larger part of his offensive attack later in his career (perhaps as he's starting to edge out of his high end prime).

There's not the data for strong conclusions and it depends where one places one's focus. Barkley's (limited) long-2 data looks better than I might have imagined. But I wouldn't have Barkley as the better shooter as a given.

[Owly]

I have books/magazines from the late 70s that list Malone at 6-10 and 220 lb. Those same books/magazines list him at 6-10 and 260 lb by the late 80s.

For comparison right now ESPN lists 6-6 Jaylen Brown, 6-6 Demar Derozan, and 6-6 Taurean Prince at 220 lb.

That's because they likely copied his rookie weight, when he was a teenager. It was a normal thing back then, look at Walt Bellamy listed weight for example.

So "officially" (or at least from Hollander yearbooks) there's two jumps from 220 to 260.
Giving the year of the offseason of publication (rather than the year on the cover)
He goes from listed at 220 going in 1979 (entering 79-80) to 235 in 1980 (+15).
Then from 235 in 1985 (entering 85-86) to 260 in 1986 (+25).

Fwiw in 1975 after his rookie year he's listed at 215.
Barry and Cohn after 94 list him at 255.

[One_and_Done]

Barkley by a mile.

[70sFan]

Barkley by a mile.

Barkley's defense would be more problematic.

[penbeast0]

Barkley by a mile.

And then once you've run that mile, the out of shape Chuckles starts panting and resting on defense while Moses just keeps banging like the energizer bunny on steroids.

[70sFan]

I don't think it's really clear that Barkley is a better shooter. Moses improved his shooting ability significantly throughout his career, so it depends on the season of course. I will post some shooting numbers for Moses later.