PDA

View Full Version : How much better would Charles Barkley have been had he not shot 3's?



Jeffy25
12-24-2014, 06:02 PM
All of the Josh Smith talk made me look into Charles Barkley, arguably the worst three point chucker of all-time

He took 2020 career 3's (134th all-time), only making 538 of them (219th all-time) good enough for a 26.6% career average (4th worst of all-time among guys with 500 attempts, worst all-time among guys with 1000 attempts)

In 1073 career games, Barkley basically chucked 2 three's per game, making one every other game. Meanwhile, he managed a .581 field goal shooting when not shooting 3's.

If he didn't take any other shots, and never shot a 3, he would have still averaged 20.64 points per game, possibly still have managed his 22 points per game, because some of these three attempts would still have been points on possessions closer to the basket.


How different could his career have been if he hadn't taken over 2000 three attempts? If different at all

Jeffy25
12-24-2014, 06:03 PM
Three's accounted for 12.8% of all of Barkley's career field goal attempts

jaydubb
12-24-2014, 06:04 PM
He mighta seen a chip or 2...

#mindfuxcked

abe_froman
12-24-2014, 06:10 PM
early in his career he didnt take many,it wasnt really until he got to phx.but yeah it def hurt his efficiency(though was still a very eff scorer)....i think he could have duplicated a few more monster years

Tony_Starks
12-24-2014, 06:26 PM
The three point shot was part of what made him such a tough cover. Back then it wasn't like it is today where all the bigs wanted to shoot 3's, he was actually a little ahead of his time. And its not like he lived out there, remember he was such a beast on the block they had to make the Charles Barkley rule.

He may not have shot a good % but he also came through with a lot of big threes when it mattered..

Howard_Zinn
12-24-2014, 06:29 PM
I watched him.. Been watching the NBA since 1981.. Barkley hit a TON of meaningful 3 pointers in his career.

Even if he was a chucker (to an extent).. That guy made big shots..

Howard_Zinn
12-24-2014, 06:32 PM
The three point shot was part of what made him such a tough cover. Back then it wasn't like it is today where all the bigs wanted to shoot 3's, he was actually a little ahead of his time. And its not like he lived out there, remember he was such a beast on the block they had to make the Charles Barkley rule.

He may not have shot a good % but he also came through with a lot of big threes when it mattered..

I just posted pretty much what you did without even reading through the thread yet.. Agreed. Barkley made big shots.. He's not Josh Smith.. lol

Smith has never been an all-star.. Barkley is one of the 50 greatest players to ever play the game.. WTF

D-Leethal
12-24-2014, 06:54 PM
He would have gotten thrashed on here, thats for sure.

Corey
12-24-2014, 10:45 PM
Same question applied to Antoine Walker and Josh Smith

InRoseWeTrust
12-24-2014, 11:01 PM
Tough question, because although he wasn't a great 3P threat, you have to wonder what the impact would have been on defenses keeping honest on it. I can't say I've seen enough tape of Charles to give an informed opinion - could see it go either way.

KnicksorBust
12-24-2014, 11:39 PM
Controlling Barkley is as uselsss as controlling Rodman or Sheed. Their playing style is what made them so dynamic.

Chronz
12-25-2014, 12:16 AM
I like to think that these shots are as much a part of their dna as their best shots are. It has to come in order to open up the rest of their game. Now he did chuck abit too much but unless it came in crunch time, I didn't have a problem with his decision making from out there. I dont know how effective he was during the clutch moments from distance but I do know he often stalled the offense to a halt in his heroic mode.


Same question applied to Antoine Walker and Josh Smith

Nah man, Walker was unique in his buffoonery. Dude was actually among the league leaders in shots near the rim once upon a time, he just shot so horribly from out there that he decided to round out his game with the chucking. Boston should have dumped him once they got Pierce.

ewing
12-25-2014, 12:27 AM
he definitely took too many 3s and i am sure his teams could have gotten better looks at times but i disagree with the idea that he would have been that much better a player, like he could have elected to get a dunk instead on those possessions. if that is what you are getting at, i think it is kinda silly. chuck should not have bombed as much as he did and his teams probably would have benifited from that

Bostonjorge
12-25-2014, 01:26 AM
Maybe it would have changed his career drastacily. Maybe he actually joins a super star player or maybe even 2. Then went to 5 finals apperance winning at least 2 titles.

Jeffy25
12-25-2014, 01:40 AM
he definitely took too many 3s and i am sure his teams could have gotten better looks at times but i disagree with the idea that he would have been that much better a player, like he could have elected to get a dunk instead on those possessions. if that is what you are getting at, i think it is kinda silly. chuck should not have bombed as much as he did and his teams probably would have benifited from that

I was getting at the idea that he move the ball around to his team mates rather than take a shot he rarely made.

How much better overall would his career have been (if any) and how much better would his teams have been (if any)?

Miltstar
12-25-2014, 02:27 AM
I just watched a 7 minute Charles Barkley, they showed about 3-4 fights and 0 three-pointers!! I watched a fair bit of that era, but I was pretty young and he was never on any of my family member's favourite teams... I never really remember him as much of a shooter, I only remember him as a bull in a china shop type player

IBleedPurple
12-25-2014, 03:52 AM
Better FG%, little to no change in team success.

Plus, about everything Chuck did from 3's to fights to rebounding to Old Spice....was awesome.

ewing
12-25-2014, 09:55 AM
I was getting at the idea that he move the ball around to his team mates rather than take a shot he rarely made.

How much better overall would his career have been (if any) and how much better would his teams have been (if any)?

Got ya. Chuck was a historic ball stopper from everywhere on the court and needed constant touches so we still wouldn't have seen great ball movement but he definitely took too many. I don't see it as an epic flaw and i am not sure how his putting it in the bag would have translated.

mightybosstone
12-25-2014, 10:28 AM
I don't think it would have had much effect on his career at all. We're not talking about guys like Walker or Smith who weren't efficient scorers in the first place. Barkley boasted a career 61.2% TS%, which is 8th best of any player in the history of the league. And as others already said, the long jumper opened up other aspects of his versatile offensive game. If you took away the 3-pointer, it's possible it could have had a slightly negative effect on his game. Then again, it's all hypothetical, so it's hard to tell.

ewing
12-25-2014, 11:12 AM
[QUOTE=mightybosstone;29433770]I don't think it would have had much effect on his career at all. We're not talking about guys like Walker or Smith who weren't efficient scorers in the first place. Barkley boasted a career 61.2% TS%, which is 8th best of any player in the history of the league. And as others already said, the long jumper opened up other aspects of his versatile offensive game. If you took away the 3-pointer, it's possible it could have had a slightly negative effect on his game. Then again, it's all hypothetical, so it's hard to tell.

People also dared Chuck to shoot that 3 a lot. I don't see how you are setting up anything when guys aren't coming out on you. Maybe he hits a couple then they start trying to contest and it sets up a drive. I don't think it is as big deal as the OP's initial post made it sound but i also think Chuck is getting a little bit of a pass here

JPS
12-25-2014, 11:02 PM
Better FG%, little to no change in team success.

Plus, about everything Chuck did from 3's to fights to rebounding to Old Spice....was awesome.

This

PatsSoxKnicks
12-27-2014, 03:08 AM
All of the Josh Smith talk made me look into Charles Barkley, arguably the worst three point chucker of all-time

He took 2020 career 3's (134th all-time), only making 538 of them (219th all-time) good enough for a 26.6% career average (4th worst of all-time among guys with 500 attempts, worst all-time among guys with 1000 attempts)

In 1073 career games, Barkley basically chucked 2 three's per game, making one every other game. Meanwhile, he managed a .581 field goal shooting when not shooting 3's.

If he didn't take any other shots, and never shot a 3, he would have still averaged 20.64 points per game, possibly still have managed his 22 points per game, because some of these three attempts would still have been points on possessions closer to the basket.


How different could his career have been if he hadn't taken over 2000 three attempts? If different at all

Have you considered the value of spacing on the 3 point shots not taken? http://www.basketballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=1209

I'm sure there's probably a better article that explains it but that one does get at the main point in the middle of the article-ish.

Jeffy25
12-28-2014, 06:26 PM
Have you considered the value of spacing on the 3 point shots not taken? http://www.basketballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=1209

I'm sure there's probably a better article that explains it but that one does get at the main point in the middle of the article-ish.

I understand.

But you are also giving up possession of the ball on many of these shots.