Karl Malone or Charles Barkley

[dalekjazz]

Who was better?

[tsherkin]

Well, Barkley was a better rebounder and a more prolific passer (though not by much).

Malone was a more prolific scorer and a considerably better defender.

Barkley was way more efficient as a scorer than Malone but also ended up playing three fewer seasons. Both of them were MVPs at least once.

Tough call but I think I stick with Malone because I like defense.

[G35]

I like Barkley better.

Not as good defensively but could step it up in big moments.

Barkley was a more dynamic offensive player. He was the equivalent of KG when he played in Philly not having any talent.

I'm also suspicious of Malones offensive game since he got to play with Stockton for the majority of his career. Having Stockton played to Malones stregnths; Stockton pretty much maxed out Malones abilities. I would say having Stockton added 4-6 points to Malones career avg.

Whereas Barkley didn't get to play with a good PG until he got to Phx with Kevin Johnson. Barkleys prime got wasted........

[Harry Palmer]

Malone had a better career. Barkley had more talent, and would be the guy of the two I would least want to face. So either, depending on how it's being asked.

[penbeast0]

Whereas Barkley didn't get to play with a good PG until he got to Phx with Kevin Johnson. Barkleys prime got wasted........

First, never saw Barkley step up defensively with any consistency no matter how big the game. His size hurt him in the post and his poor defensive instincts hurt him when he moved away from it . . . plus he never cared that much about it. Charles was a me guy.

Second, Charles played 8 years in Philly. The first 5 were with a PG named Maurice Cheeks who is one of the all-time great pass first PG's, at least even with KJ in court IQ though not as a scorer. The next three were with Johnny Dawkins, who was an above average player though not Stockton, and when Dawkins was injured, with Ricky Green who was a former All-star that was in the top 10 in assist 4 times.

Barkley played his whole career with excellent PGs. He just wasn't the monomaniac about conditioning and basketball that Karl Malone was and, as such though he had at least equal talent, was never as good.

[dbodner]

The first 5 were with a PG named Maurice Cheeks who is one of the all-time great pass first PG's, at least even with KJ in court IQ though not as a scorer.

I'm a Maurice Cheeks fan, and grew up during that era of Sixers basketball. But he wasn't near the setup man Stockton was, which was the original posters point. The OP's point about him not playing with good point guards is wrong as you pointed out, but his point about Malone getting an edge playing with stockton is valid nonetheless.

[AnSweR07]

I like Barkley better.

Not as good defensively but could step it up in big moments.

Barkley was a more dynamic offensive player. He was the equivalent of KG when he played in Philly not having any talent.

I'm also suspicious of Malones offensive game since he got to play with Stockton for the majority of his career. Having Stockton played to Malones stregnths; Stockton pretty much maxed out Malones abilities. I would say having Stockton added 4-6 points to Malones career avg.

Whereas Barkley didn't get to play with a good PG until he got to Phx with Kevin Johnson. Barkleys prime got wasted........

Don't try to take away credit where its due. It don't matter how good your pg is if you can't make the shot.

[G35]

-= original quote snipped =-



First, never saw Barkley step up defensively with any consistency no matter how big the game. His size hurt him in the post and his poor defensive instincts hurt him when he moved away from it . . . plus he never cared that much about it. Charles was a me guy.

Second, Charles played 8 years in Philly. The first 5 were with a PG named Maurice Cheeks who is one of the all-time great pass first PG's, at least even with KJ in court IQ though not as a scorer. The next three were with Johnny Dawkins, who was an above average player though not Stockton, and when Dawkins was injured, with Ricky Green who was a former All-star that was in the top 10 in assist 4 times.

Barkley played his whole career with excellent PGs. He just wasn't the monomaniac about conditioning and basketball that Karl Malone was and, as such though he had at least equal talent, was never as good.

I know who Maurice Cheeks is I saw Maurice when the Sixers were battling the Celtics every year. Maurice was on the down swing when Barkley started dominating. Marice never avg'd double figure assist even with scorers like Toney, Dr J, Moses, Bobby Jones and Darryl Dawkins on his team. Maurice had great court IQ but then so did Avery Johnson that doesn't equate to talent.

Johnny Dawkins? He got worse every year that he was in Philly his assist avg while he was there:

1989 7.4
1990 7.0
1991 6.9
1992 4.6
1993 3.7

And Rickey Green? The one year that he played with Barkley he avg'd 5 assists a game.

Give me a break each of those guys were middle of the road PG's at best when they played with Barkley. Which is why Barkley said he wanted to get traded to a better team. He pulled a Kobe on the Sixers. None of those guys come even close to what Stockton did for Malone.

Yes an assist man doesn't make the basket for you but pick and roll is synonymous with Stockton/Malone. The pick and roll is the highest percentage play in the game and no one did it better than Stockton.

Don't try and underrate what Stockton did for Malones career. I would like to see Malone go to the finals with Johnny Dawkins or Rickey Green........

[risktaker91]

I like Malone.

[penbeast0]

Maurice had great court IQ but then so did Avery Johnson that doesn't equate to talent.

Johnny Dawkins? He got worse every year that he was in Philly his assist avg while he was there:

1989 7.4
1990 7.0
1991 6.9
1992 4.6
1993 3.7

And Rickey Green? The one year that he played with Barkley he avg'd 5 assists a game.

Give me a break each of those guys were middle of the road PG's at best when they played with Barkley

mmm . . . None of the three were Stockton's equal as a playmaker true but Cheeks is one of the top 20 PGs of all time, hardly middle of road . . .

and the first three years averaging 7.2 assists/game were the ones Dawkins played with Barkley, the other two he was only playing part time due to injuries and the acquisition of Jeff Hornacek.

Also, Barkley liked to dribble the ball up and play PG himself (thus his higher assist and turnover numbers), Malone was pretty much a finisher so Barkley cuts his PG's assist totals too.

[tnayrbrocks]

Give me the guy who plays defense

[FJS]

Malone was better, in many areas.

[Hard2dhole]

Malone Easy

[a-rod]

anyone here knows the Charles Barkley rule? if you do than you will understand why am i picking Malone over Charles .

[G35]

-= original quote snipped =-



mmm . . . None of the three were Stockton's equal as a playmaker true but Cheeks is one of the top 20 PGs of all time, hardly middle of road . . .

and the first three years averaging 7.2 assists/game were the ones Dawkins played with Barkley, the other two he was only playing part time due to injuries and the acquisition of Jeff Hornacek.

Also, Barkley liked to dribble the ball up and play PG himself (thus his higher assist and turnover numbers), Malone was pretty much a finisher so Barkley cuts his PG's assist totals too.

Yes Maurice is probably a top 20 PG but not based off the back half of his career.

And what you said about Malone is exactly why I say Barkley was a better creator and more dynamic offensive player than Malone. Malone was a FINISHER; all he had to do was run to the spot and Stockton would get him the ball to finish. Not every PG can do that and Stockton did it better than almost anyone........

[penbeast0]

I would actually agree that Barkley was a better offensive player than Karl Malone . . . or for that matter, any other PF in history. But he wasn't a better player because of his terrible defense and questionable attitude (the late night drinking, the fights, the blaming teammates,etc.). He's probably top 5 though with Malone and Duncan ahead of him . . . competing with Pettit, McHale, Rodman?, Hayes, etc.

[G35]

I would actually agree that Barkley was a better offensive player than Karl Malone . . . or for that matter, any other PF in history. But he wasn't a better player because of his terrible defense and questionable attitude (the late night drinking, the fights, the blaming teammates,etc.). He's probably top 5 though with Malone and Duncan ahead of him . . . competing with Pettit, McHale, Rodman?, Hayes, etc.

Ok yeah I agree with that. His off court behavior and conditioning prevented him from maxing out his abilities. He wasn't the best leader and was pretty hypocritical about defense. But imo at his best he was better than Malone at his best.


I would rank the PF's

Duncan his combination of offense/defense and sense of team is unparallelled imo
Barkley best offensive PF
Malone great two way player that maximized his abilities through hard work

[penbeast0]

Duncan
Malone
Pettit
Hayes
Barkley
McHale
then I'd have to evaluate a few guys for next spot.

[bballcool34]

Duncan
Malone
Pettit
Hayes
Barkley
McHale
then I'd have to evaluate a few guys for next spot.

I see Garnett or DeBusschere competing for a spot on that list after McHale.

[tha_rock220]

I'm also suspicious of Malones offensive game since he got to play with Stockton for the majority of his career. Having Stockton played to Malones stregnths; Stockton pretty much maxed out Malones abilities. I would say having Stockton added 4-6 points to Malones career avg.

Be suspicious all you want, but tthe flip side of that argument is that a dynamic scorer like Malone really made Stockston look good. It's easier to rack up dimes when your leading scorer can shoot, post up, and drive fairly well.