RealGM

Michael Jordan is everything Julius Erving COULD HAVE been. Erving was a little bigger, had massive mitts like Mike, could jump out of the gym etc but his jumper was always sketchy and he wasn’t nearly as polished as Jordan. He got by on his athleticism and never truly developed his skills to the point where he was fine tuned. He also went 1-3 in the Finals. If he doesn’t blow a 2-0 lead against Portland in 1977 and takes care of LA in 1980 with Kareem out injured, he’d be 3-1 and viewed much more favorably.

Tim Duncan is everything Kevin McHale COULD HAVE been. McHale was a better low post scorer than Duncan and near equal defensively. He had better low post moves and was a better FT shooter. He didn’t have Duncan’s determination to be the best though. He was one of those guys who didn’t live basketball 24/7. That’s why Larry Bird always picks Dennis Johnson as his best teammate. He’s pissed because he knows he could’ve had more titles if Kevin was hungrier. McHale admits as much. He just didn’t live and die basketball.

Karl Malone is everything Charles Barkley COULD HAVE been. Barkley was a freakish talent, way more so than Malone but Malone ended up with more points, rebounds, MVP’s, Finals appearances etc. Malone was a workhorse who was always in shape. Barkley was lazy and never gave it his all in terms of reaching his max potential. He should’ve had the better career.

Kobe Bryant is everything Vince Carter COULD HAVE been. Vince was bigger, more athletic, jumped higher and had more range but he didn’t have Kobe’s heart or desire. He should have scoring titles, MVP’s, titles etc but only has a dunk title in his trophy case. He was a guy who WAS polished but never dialed in mentally. He should have had Kobe’s career.

Keep it going……….

Maybe starting fewer (or no) repetitive threads and instead post in existing threads would be a good idea. Everything that pops into your head doesn't have to be a new thread.

MickeyDavis wrote:Maybe start fewer (or no) repetitive threads and instead post in existing threads would be a good idea. Everything that pops into your head doesn't have to be a new thread.

I think he was already banned on The General Board for creating troll threads - https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=2392927
Hope PC mods are aware of this.

At-least two of these comparisons are nothing similar at all (maybe even 3 with Dr J vs Jordan) , for plenty of reasons…

Charles Barkley is what Zion should be + more. Bigger, stronger, a little more explosive. Modern ball handle skills. better touch around rim. Cant seem to stay healthy though and hasn't bothered to develop any sort of mid range shot.

Redmoon wrote:Charles Barkley is what Zion should be + more. Bigger, stronger, a little more explosive. Modern ball handle skills. better touch around rim. Cant seem to stay healthy though and hasn't bothered to develop any sort of mid range shot.

Yeah, the fact that Barkley led the league in rebounding one year (14.6 in 1986-87) while Zion averages 7 or 8 is perplexing. Zion should grab 10 a night minimum.

Hair Jordan wrote:

Redmoon wrote:Charles Barkley is what Zion should be + more. Bigger, stronger, a little more explosive. Modern ball handle skills. better touch around rim. Cant seem to stay healthy though and hasn't bothered to develop any sort of mid range shot.

Yeah, the fact that Barkley led the league in rebounding one year (14.6 in 1986-87) while Zion averages 7 or 8 is perplexing. Zion should grab 10 a night minimum.

TBF, Barkley is an anomaly. Rebounding ability of that level at that size isn't common. And he was doing it even as his athleticism failed and left him in his 30s. He was a double-digit rebounder every year of his career but his first, and was a 10+ REB36 guy that year too. IN his LAST year, 36 years old, injured, fat and slow, he still averaged 10.5 rpg in 31 mpg.

Barkley was quite impressive as a rebounder. Zion... is not. At either end. I don't know that simply being athletic and being a similar height really merits the Barkley comparison in that regard. On offense, perhaps, but in no way does he exhibit Barkley's nose for the ball, which went well beyond physical tools.