Reply With Quote
Lol tied =x
Barkley
Garnett
Who was better?
Lol tied =x
Really close in my opinion. Could go either way. Charles was a better offensive player, more potent scorer, and probably a slightly better rebounder. KG was a better defender, better passer, much more versatile. I give KG a very slight advantage because his defense and versatility helped win a championship. KG had to go to a better team to do it and he was no longer the same KG when he did it, but Charles tried to go to better teams as well, twice to Phoenix and then to Houston. Charles was one of my favorite players growing up and he's definitely more dynamic and a much more explosive scorer and some people tend to look at that more than anything. But KG's versatility and championship tip the scales towards him, for me.
I take Kevin Garnett all day. He has handled himself with more class than Charles Barkley, he's played on the big stage twice and won a ring. He was the leading rebounder in the league, and an all-defensive 1st-teamer throughout his prime. Houston couldn't even get out of the first round with Barkley towards the end of his career, Boston made it to the Finals.
He was a true leader, taking responsibility, and he cared very deeply about the game, winning, and his leadership role. Barkley cared about being the tougher player than the one he was guarding. He ripped his franchise every time they had an early-season knockout and there were plenty in every stop. Barkley, in his own words, "didn't give a damn about defense." He was always battling his weight when he was in the league, with exception to the 1992-93 season where he played for the Dream Team, won the MVP, and made it to the Finals. He hides all these flaws behind losing to Michael Jordan in 1993.
Kevin Garnett. Kevin Garnett. Kevin Garnett. It's not even close.
[QUOTE=Darrin;4580344]I take Kevin Garnett all day. He has handled himself with more class than Charles Barkley, he's played on the big stage twice and won a ring. He was the leading rebounder in the league, and an all-defensive 1st-teamer throughout his prime. Houston couldn't even get out of the first round with Barkley towards the end of his career, Boston made it to the Finals.
He was a true leader, taking responsibility, and he cared very deeply about the game, winning, and his leadership role. Barkley cared about being the tougher player than the one he was guarding. He ripped his franchise every time they had an early-season knockout and there were plenty in every stop. Barkley, in his own words, "didn't give a damn about defense." He was always battling his weight when he was in the league, with exception to the 1992-93 season where he played for the Dream Team, won the MVP, and made it to the Finals. He hides all these flaws behind losing to Michael Jordan in 1993.
Kevin Garnett. Kevin Garnett. Kevin Garnett. It's not even close.
/QUOTE]
Agree with everything but this.
Offensively Barkley was better a lot better IMHO ...he can post developed 3 pt range, could hid the medium range jumper and has a better post game even though KG was MUCH taller.So for all the advantages KG has on defense and leadership, Chuck had them as a scorer. And I think Chuck especially early in his career was the better rebounder too which people normally credit to defense. I don't but many do.
But the edge for KG on defense is just as impressive. He is the better; shot blocker, help defender and despite his small frame, post defender.
IMHO still comes down to rings. KG though aging was the indisputable leader of the Celts and his defense improved Allen's and Pierce's. Those guys had to defend because KG would not accept anything less.
To me it's close, but chuck is one of the greatest to never ring ...KG got his and that gives him the edge. I always choose the rings when it is close and i think it is close.
who is a better center?
duncan or shaq?
Close call but I'll choose Duncan. Duncan has more rings, more MVP's (though not a huge deal to me) is the better team defender, has better post moves, a better mid range jumper, and when younger the better pnr defender.
in 2000 and the 2001 playoffs Shaq may have been the most dominant player since MJ. If Shaq had maintained that level of play for even 5 more of his seasons I would give him the nod over Duncan, Hakeem or anyone else.
Shaq in the end is an example of getting by doing just enough to win. Coversely Duncan, is an example of a guy who got the most out his talent. And became the best even though he was nowhere near as gifted athletically as Shaq.
Did someone imply Garnett was a better rebounder then Barkley
Bark.
Sam Bowie or Greg Oden ?
Peak Barkley or career Barkley?
Peak Barkley had a TS% of an average of around 66%, which is insane efficiency on offense. His offensive rating also leads league history or something, having a 128 in his best year.
Barkley in his 76er's era > Garnett in Minn, BUT kevin has won a ring...
I always find it interesting how Barkley gets so much praise, while Malone is always criticized by today's fans..
It seems like people question how good a player Malone would have been without Stockton.
I don't agree with it.
Malone came off as a jerk
Intense.
KG stats a bit inflated due to playin on a one man team
seriously give me barks
kg all da way, ain't no playa barkin like dis dawg. barkley was a scrub, even my fat ass could outrun him in his prime, yo ima pro athlete myself cause i can jump of bridges professionally but people jus get blown by my swag and dont notice all my talent.
Might as well go back to your purch account now that you got the team and team color change.
There. Gonna rock the bell
You also have a in your ass you dumb mother er!
Barkley imposed his will on games better than Garnett did but Barkley's downfall was his defense. It's easy to say wow, look at all those points and rebounds but he was like Nash, gaudy numbers and he couldn't defend anyone. When you don't defend your teams ultimately fail. Barkley might be the more impressive individual player but if I want to win a championship I would take Garnett as a #2 guy on a team over Barkley.
Last edited by namlook; 09-26-2010 at 09:02 PM.
Anyone that votes Garnett in this poll is a ing moron.
Barkley was a "first Man" all the way through....
Garnett proved he was a "second man" his entire career....
To make it clear in this particular poll....
Barkley = Batman
Garnett = Robin
Robin is pretty good, but nothing compared to Batman.
Wait what?
Prime Duncan couldn't defend.
Now I've heard it all.
[QUOTE=phyzik;4645916]Anyone that votes Garnett in this poll is a ing moron.
Barkley was a "first Man" all the way through....
Anybody picking against a 7 foot great two way player, i.e. also a great defender is a moron. When did Barkley, who was on some stacked teams, ever win a le? Garnett set some NBA records for seasons with at least 5 assists to go along with 10+ rebounds, and 20+ points. Garnett in his prime was second to no one, except Mr. Duncan.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
