PDA

View Full Version : Would Charles Barkley be the best big man in the league today?



Meth
04-24-2016, 06:29 AM
He was an absolute beast back when he played. At 6'5"(?) he was able to do it all: score down low, rebound, handle, and lead a fast break. He was an efficient scorer, and could have been more efficient if he didn't attempt as many threes. How would he stack up in today's league? Would he be the best center in today's league?

DboneG
04-24-2016, 09:02 AM
Yes. Charles Barkley would be one of the best big men in any era, including this weak no good defense playing era. He may be even more dominate, with the rule changes of today, and how the refs officiate today. A flaw Charles had was defense. So, he would fit right in.

JasonJohnHorn
04-24-2016, 10:01 AM
No. Too small, and relied to much on the back-to-the-basket. Also, not a strong enough defender (not sure where why some people think this league has weak defenders).

He's be great because of his passing, but he'd have limitations because the game has moved away from the basket.

DboneG
04-24-2016, 10:37 AM
Charles Barkley ran the floor with the best of them in his hey-day. His posting caused all kinds of problems, foul trouble, easy baskets for teammates, putting teams in the penalty early, teams had to help out. Which would be great today, it could lead to 3pt. shots. And he had a decent outside shot...so, if you wanted to draw the opponents big man out you could. The game has moved away from solid one-on-one defense.

effen5
04-24-2016, 10:39 AM
Easily one of the best

FlashBolt
04-24-2016, 11:00 AM
He would be Zach Randolph but much more explosive. Defense wouldn't be as huge of an issue for him as well. He'll easily be a top PF. Game translates well for him.

5ass
04-24-2016, 04:31 PM
Paul Millsap

Phantom Dreamer
04-24-2016, 06:31 PM
Parents should be role models

IKnowHoops
04-24-2016, 06:34 PM
Barkley would be a beast. Prime Barkley would average 25 plus points and 12 plus rebounds in this era.

slaker619
04-24-2016, 07:52 PM
Nah too small would be a Paul M. tops

ewing
04-24-2016, 08:13 PM
No. Too small, and relied to much on the back-to-the-basket. Also, not a strong enough defender (not sure where why some people think this league has weak defenders).

He's be great because of his passing, but he'd have limitations because the game has moved away from the basket.

he would not be asked to defended muscle bound 6'11 post players every night today. His combination of speed and power would make him a better defender today then he was in his time. Barkley was ahead of his time if anything. I think he would be an improved version of Blake Griffen.

Chronz
04-24-2016, 09:19 PM
Why do people act like Chuck didn't adapt to the back down rule changes? He would've backed down less today and face up more like every other big and he's one of the few with the vision to abuse zones

naps
04-24-2016, 09:30 PM
Yes. He played in the greatest era of bigmen and still held his own like any of them. And I actually think his passing skills would translate even better with all these shooting of this era. If his size didn't matter for banging down low and positioning himself for rebounding with those guys, it's safer to assume he would grab more rebounds now.

DboneG
04-24-2016, 11:43 PM
Barkley =Milsap....you are so right! Milsap 45pts. 13rebounds tonight...

FlashBolt
04-24-2016, 11:57 PM
Yes. He played in the greatest era of bigmen and still held his own like any of them. And I actually think his passing skills would translate even better with all these shooting of this era. If his size didn't matter for banging down low and positioning himself for rebounding with those guys, it's safer to assume he would grab more rebounds now.

More rebounds? IDK about that. More three point shooting usually leads to less rebounds for those in the paint.

Scoots
04-25-2016, 10:48 AM
No. Didn't play enough D

smith&wesson
04-25-2016, 11:04 AM
He would easily be a super star and probably the best big in the game... keep in mind Barkley's all time stats are very similar to Duncan's.

joedaheights
04-25-2016, 11:07 AM
He was an absolute beast back when he played. At 6'5"(?) he was able to do it all: score down low, rebound, handle, and lead a fast break. He was an efficient scorer, and could have been more efficient if he didn't attempt as many threes. How would he stack up in today's league? Would he be the best center in today's league?

He wasn't a center in the 90s... My god basketball stupid is everywhere

lakerfan85
04-25-2016, 11:09 AM
You guys are nuts if you think Barkley wouldn't be great today.. He's easily a top 5 power forward of all time..

smith&wesson
04-25-2016, 11:10 AM
He was an absolute beast back when he played. At 6'5"(?) he was able to do it all: score down low, rebound, handle, and lead a fast break. He was an efficient scorer, and could have been more efficient if he didn't attempt as many threes. How would he stack up in today's league? Would he be the best center in today's league?

He def wasn't a C ... but as a pf in today's game yes I would say he would be among the best. Anthony Davis would probably be better if he was healthy and on the court more though.

smith&wesson
04-25-2016, 11:12 AM
You guys are nuts if you think Barkley wouldn't be great today.. He's easily a top 5 power forward of all time..


for people comparing him to Milsap and Randolph lol :crazy:

Barkley was a superstar in an era where there were a lot of better bigs in the league. Milsap and Randolph are boarder line allstars in an era where the big men are simply not as dominant. its not even close

FlashBolt
04-25-2016, 11:43 AM
No. Didn't play enough D

Lots of PF's don't play enough D these days. He would be unstoppable offensively.

KnicksorBust
04-25-2016, 11:52 AM
My gut reaction when I first read this thread was "yes of course." Then I sat down and thought about it. I went through all the big men in the league currently and after doing some research I'm going to have to go with "yes of course." Tim Duncan is past his prime. Dirk would make for a great debate but he's also past his prime. Don't get me wrong 2 way players like Millsap, Horford and *healthy* Marc Gasol are great. Aldridge is thriving in San Antonio and Anthony Davis has shown monster potential. Plus there are young upside bigs like Karl Anthony Towns. There are competitors worth mentioning but none of them have the combination of being at the peaks and being able to dominate like Barkley. Probably one of the most underrated offensive players in NBA History.

smith&wesson
04-25-2016, 12:01 PM
My gut reaction when I first read this thread was "yes of course." Then I sat down and thought about it. I went through all the big men in the league currently and after doing some research I'm going to have to go with "yes of course." Tim Duncan is past his prime. Dirk would make for a great debate but he's also past his prime. Don't get me wrong 2 way players like Millsap, Horford and *healthy* Marc Gasol are great. Aldridge is thriving in San Antonio and Anthony Davis has shown monster potential. Plus there are young upside bigs like Karl Anthony Towns. There are competitors worth mentioning but none of them have the combination of being at the peaks and being able to dominate like Barkley. Probably one of the most underrated offensive players in NBA History.

agreed.

Duncan
KG
Malone
Dirk

plug Barkley in where ever you want in that list ... he is really right up there with the top 5 pf's all time. To me its no question he would dominate today and pretty much in any era as the numbers suggest he is among the elite for his position.

naps
04-25-2016, 12:32 PM
for people comparing him to Milsap and Randolph lol :crazy:

Barkley was a superstar in an era where there were a lot of better bigs in the league. Milsap and Randolph are boarder line allstars in an era where the big men are simply not as dominant. its not even close

Yeah I laughed seeing comparisons to these guys. Barkley was an absolute monster.

FlashBolt
04-25-2016, 12:41 PM
Comparisons to Randolph in terms of paint control.

TheNumber37
04-25-2016, 01:08 PM
He'd be a tweener.

No way he could defend the SFs like Lebron, KD, Melo, George
He'd probably play at the 4, but not a good enough outside shooter to stretch the defenses.

best Big man? He's 6'5 right, no.

FlashBolt
04-25-2016, 01:21 PM
He'd be a tweener.

No way he could defend the SFs like Lebron, KD, Melo, George
He'd probably play at the 4, but not a good enough outside shooter to stretch the defenses.

best Big man? He's 6'5 right, no.

Why would he be defending SF's? He wasn't a terrible shooter and he had no incentive to be one. With all the shooting coaches and emphasis on shooting these days, Barkley would be able to hit the .350% mark. That's not bad and good enough to stretch the defense. He's 6'5 but he dominated against 6'10 dudes. Dennis Rodman was 6'7. It's not always about height here. He would absolutely DESTROY guys like Love and LaMarcus. His perimeter game wasn't terrible, he could run the floor, he was powerful enough to back anyone down. I don't see an argument there.

valade16
04-25-2016, 01:30 PM
He'd be a tweener.

No way he could defend the SFs like Lebron, KD, Melo, George
He'd probably play at the 4, but not a good enough outside shooter to stretch the defenses.

best Big man? He's 6'5 right, no.

He would be the player you get guys who can stretch the defense to play around. He would be the focal point of the offense.

ewing
04-25-2016, 01:34 PM
He would be the player you get guys who can stretch the defense to play around. He would be the focal point of the offense.

exactly Barkely stretches your defense by collapsing it. you need multiple guys rotating to stop him from dunking on your head every time down.

smith&wesson
04-25-2016, 01:36 PM
He'd be a tweener.

No way he could defend the SFs like Lebron, KD, Melo, George
He'd probably play at the 4, but not a good enough outside shooter to stretch the defenses.

best Big man? He's 6'5 right, no.

6'6, 252 lbs ... You can say he was undersized, but he know how to use his body.

-His career numbers 22.1 ppg, 11.7 rpg over 15 seasons.
-His best rebounding year was in 86-87 with 14.7 rpg.
-His best offensive season was in 87-88 at 28.3 ppg.

The guys was a monster, who cares how tall he was... Remember he was a big man in the era when big men were still dominant and he put up those numbers.

Scoots
04-25-2016, 02:06 PM
Lots of PF's don't play enough D these days. He would be unstoppable offensively.

The question was "would Charles Barkley be the BEST big man".

He'd be a superstar I have little doubt. But the best is a mighty hill to climb.

Barkley admitted he was only 6'4"ish.

I loved Barkley as a player, but to be the very best among all bigs you have to play D too.

valade16
04-25-2016, 02:36 PM
The question was "would Charles Barkley be the BEST big man".

He'd be a superstar I have little doubt. But the best is a mighty hill to climb.

Barkley admitted he was only 6'4"ish.

I loved Barkley as a player, but to be the very best among all bigs you have to play D too.

How so? This is one of the weakest eras for big men in NBA history.

The mighty hill he'd have to climb this season would be being better than LMA, Millsap, a down year for AD and a rookie KAT. He is and would be better than all of them.

Also, you don't have to be great on one side of the court to be the best, otherwise Kawhi would definitely be better than Curry because of his stellar play on both sides. But we all collectively realize Curry's O is so much better than Kawhi's, not even Kawhi's stellar defense closes the gap on who is the better player.

It is the same here. Millsap's defense is not so good that it would bridge the gap between how much better Barkley's O and rebounding would be over Millsap's.

FlashBolt
04-25-2016, 02:41 PM
If LMA is doing just fine without defense, Barkley would do better. That's my case.

CardinalRed24
04-25-2016, 02:41 PM
No, but he'd be an all-star. I could see him averaging 21-22ppg, 8.5reb, 3.8asst. Along those lines.
I honestly do think we'd see his career averages take a slight dip in today's league. Nothing drastic. He'd still be a force and would instantly turn things around in Philly playing with Noel/Okafor.

KnicksorBust
04-25-2016, 02:47 PM
agreed.

Duncan
KG
Malone
Dirk

plug Barkley in where ever you want in that list ... he is really right up there with the top 5 pf's all time. To me its no question he would dominate today and pretty much in any era as the numbers suggest he is among the elite for his position.

Yeah the PF debate is always the most fun. You could literally plug any of them in at #2 and make a strong case.

KnicksorBust
04-25-2016, 02:48 PM
The question was "would Charles Barkley be the BEST big man".

He'd be a superstar I have little doubt. But the best is a mighty hill to climb.

Barkley admitted he was only 6'4"ish.

I loved Barkley as a player, but to be the very best among all bigs you have to play D too.

Curious what current players you would rank above him RIGHT NOW?

kdspurman
04-25-2016, 02:51 PM
If LMA is doing just fine without defense, Barkley would do better. That's my case.

LMA has been very good defensively this year

kdspurman
04-25-2016, 02:53 PM
How so? This is one of the weakest eras for big men in NBA history.

The mighty hill he'd have to climb this season would be being better than LMA, Millsap, a down year for AD and a rookie KAT. He is and would be better than all of them.

Also, you don't have to be great on one side of the court to be the best, otherwise Kawhi would definitely be better than Curry because of his stellar play on both sides. But we all collectively realize Curry's O is so much better than Kawhi's, not even Kawhi's stellar defense closes the gap on who is the better player.

It is the same here. Millsap's defense is not so good that it would bridge the gap between how much better Barkley's O and rebounding would be over Millsap's.

I think he and a healthy Griffin would be close, but I'd probably lean towards Chuck

KnicksorBust
04-25-2016, 02:55 PM
I think he and a healthy Griffin would be close, but I'd probably lean towards Chuck

Yep this is pretty much spot-on. With Davis and Towns having potential to be on that level as well. And Porzingis potential to be far better than all.

valade16
04-25-2016, 03:08 PM
Yep this is pretty much spot-on. With Davis and Towns having potential to be on that level as well. And Porzingis potential to be far better than all.

I thought we were talking about this season so Griffin and Marc Gasol obviously have been injured.

If they are healthy Barkley is battling with Griffin for best currently with AD if he bounces back and KAT if he improves as expected.

Porzingis is a little further off developmentally but he will possibly be in the mix in the future as well.

BHF
04-25-2016, 05:04 PM
Draymond Green on steroids with the best post up game in the league that is what Barkley would be in the nba today.

Phantom Dreamer
04-25-2016, 05:25 PM
Prime Barkley was a beast. He would be an elite player today.

WOwolfOL
04-25-2016, 05:58 PM
One of the most incredible players in NBA history when you account for what he did at all of 6'4. It really should not have been possible to post the numbers he did, and I highly, highly doubt anybody will ever do it again.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N915A using Tapatalk

xxplayerxx23
04-25-2016, 07:01 PM
People saying no need to be drug tested. He would dominate. 25+ and 12 easy

xxplayerxx23
04-25-2016, 07:02 PM
People don't box out he would dominate the boards. Defense whatever but offensivley he would destroy

Raps08-09 Champ
04-25-2016, 09:06 PM
I think so.

Meth
04-26-2016, 02:04 AM
He wasn't a center in the 90s... My god basketball stupid is everywhere

u right, small ball lineups don't exist in today's league.

If Draymond Green, who is 6'6 or 6'7 at best, plays center effectively, then Barkley can too. In fact, Barkley would neutralize Draymond's effectiveness on the court.