Karl Malone vs Charles Barkley

Alex_De_Large · Post #1 » by **Alex_De_Large** » Wed May 7, 2008 2:23 am

I think its really close between them,

choose the best between: the best player in his prime and better overall.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=I87edutABG8

CHARLES (1985/86-1995/96)

POINTS PER GAME: 22.14
SCORING EFFICIENCY FG%: 54.1%
REBOUNDS PER GAME: 11.7 (4 Offensive Rebounds Per Game!)
ASSITS PER GAME: 3.9
STEALES PER GAME: 1.54
BLOCKS PER GAME: 0.83
THREE POINT SHOOTING EFFICIENCY FG%: 26.6%

Play-Offs (Clutch Time):

PPG: 25.7
FG%:53.99%
RPG: 13.29
APG: 4.41
SPG: 1.65
BPG: 0.96
3-POINT FG%:25%

http://youtube.com/watch?v=MgzSE_54gZQ

KARL (1986/87-1996/97)

POINTS PER GAME: 25.0
SCORING EFFICIENCY FG%: 51.6%
REBOUNDS PER GAME: 10.1 (2.4 Offensive Rebounds Per Game)
ASSITS PER GAME: 3.6
STEALES PER GAME: 1.41
BLOCKS PER GAME: 0.78
THREE POINT SHOOTING EFFICIENCY: 27.4%

Play-Offs (Clutch Time):

PPG: 27.1
FG%: 46.42%
RPG: 11.84
APG: 2.59
SPG: 1.42
BPG: 0.79
3-POINT FG%: 11.53%

The Diesel · Post #2 » by **The Diesel** » Wed May 7, 2008 2:36 am

Barkley.

Malone is over-rated.

That Nicka · Post #3 » by **That Nicka** » Wed May 7, 2008 2:42 am

Barkley had the better prime imo, but Malone was built to last

jzmagik · Post #4 » by **jzmagik** » Wed May 7, 2008 3:17 am

Mailman doesn't deliver on Sundays, or in the playoffs. It's not suprisng to see that his fg% takes a big dip in the playoffs as opposed to regular season.

Post #5 » by **penbeast0** » Wed May 7, 2008 3:28 am

Barkley was slightly the better offensive player. Malone, however, takes the overall edge for two reasons. (1) defense . . . he was good, Barkley was awful and (2) reliability . . . Malone was there every day, every year, every practice, giving full effort; Barkley was more injury prone (heck, everyone else ever was more injury prone, not a knock on Chuckles) and not much of a practice player.

shawngoat23 · Post #6 » by **shawngoat23** » Wed May 7, 2008 7:34 am

It's close. Barkley the better offensive player, Malone the better defensive; Barkley the better prime, Malone more longevity; Barkley more explosive, Malone more consistent. I'll go with Chuck though because he was one of my favorite players ever.

chrice · Post #7 » by **chrice** » Wed May 7, 2008 11:40 am

Sir Charles ftw.

HarlemHeat37 · Post #8 » by **HarlemHeat37** » Wed May 7, 2008 4:34 pm

I don't see how anybody takes Barkley here..

Malone's offense is close enough, that his far superior defense gives him the edge IMO..

no disrespect to the OP, but can the mods ban any threads involving Karl Malone? it's just disgusting at this point..

WesWesley · Post #9 » by **WesWesley** » Wed May 7, 2008 4:37 pm

It pains me to say it, but I gotta go with the father of many of these posters.

carrottop12 · Post #10 » by **carrottop12** » Wed May 7, 2008 5:31 pm

Malone, his MVP seasons were equal to Barkley's, over the long hall he was better, and his defense was always better.

candy for lunch · Post #11 » by **candy for lunch** » Wed May 7, 2008 7:01 pm

HarlemHeat37 wrote:I don't see how anybody takes Barkley here..

I prefer players who in college don't impregnate 13 year olds, and who don't hunt for mexican girls.

KNICKS1970 · Post #12 » by **KNICKS1970** » Wed May 7, 2008 7:05 pm

supersteve wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

I prefer players who in college don't impregnate 13 year olds, and who don't hunt for mexican girls.

Well, that has nothing to do with anything Karl Malone did on the court.

I will say though that Wes_Wesley's post made me legit LOL. :rofl:

The Diesel · Post #13 » by **The Diesel** » Wed May 7, 2008 7:12 pm

Let's keep this basketball related; this has the potential to be a really good thread.

Post #14 » by **loserX** » Wed May 7, 2008 9:18 pm

supersteve wrote:I prefer players who in college don't impregnate 13 year olds, and who don't hunt for mexican girls.

Good point. I don't like players whose last names rhyme with Shmarkley, therefore Malone was a better basketball player.

Anyway, I kind of agree with the consensus...Barkley peaked higher but petered out sooner. It's a pretty good comparison, but with the differences in longevity and defence, I give a slight nod to Malone.

Blackfyre · Post #15 » by **Blackfyre** » Wed May 7, 2008 9:25 pm

Karl Malone , similar offense and better defense.

AgEnT50 · Post #16 » by **AgEnT50** » Wed May 7, 2008 10:44 pm

chrice wrote:Sir Charles ftw.

Teddy KGB · Post #17 » by **Teddy KGB** » Thu May 8, 2008 12:49 am

Mailman ftw

candy for lunch · Post #18 » by **candy for lunch** » Thu May 8, 2008 1:44 am

loserX wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

Good point. I don't like players whose last names rhyme with Shmarkley, therefore Malone was a better basketball player.

I don't like players who have a fantastic history of injuring others. :roll:

carrottop12 · Post #19 » by **carrottop12** » Thu May 8, 2008 2:12 am

supersteve wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

I don't like players who have a fantastic history of injuring others.

Apparently you didn't watch the NBA 15 years ago.

Charles Barkley wrote:When I played with Kevin Johnson and he got hit, I would tell him to let his man beat him into the lane then I'd try to maim his ass.

BirdIsDaKing · Post #20 » by **BirdIsDaKing** » Thu May 8, 2008 3:42 am

Wes_Wesley wrote:It pains me to say it, but I gotta go with the father of many of these posters.

Shawn Kemp?