Damn Barkley really was a top 5 player back in the day

[MooseMouthMthafuga]

I'm 36, my first real memory of Barkley was the 93 run, I was cheering for em heavy against MJ...

So I got to see some of prime Chuck, and his tail end, and even that doesn't do justice

You'd have to be 40 to truly appreciate Chuck

Yeah '93 stands out because he made it to the Finals

and won MVP, but a lot of people felt like he had his

best years in Philly.He was on the brink of entering the

twilight of his career by the time he got to Phoenix.The

Suns just had a superior supporting cast.Atheltically,

he was probably at level 7 in Phx.Opposed to being at

level 9 during most of his years with the Sixers

 

[Houston911]

Top 5 tho?? Lots of people knew he was a hall of famer. But we talking about a 7yr stretch from like 86-93 where he was elite. That shyt would be a revelation to most of this board cause they wouldnt have been able to see that in real time....unless they 40 plus

They would know the same way they know about everyone else

He was 1st and 2nd team all nba every year during that stretch

 

[murksiderock]

He would be called a loser if his career played out the same exact way in this era

They definitely would...

Every Star playing eating in this era, he woulda snatched one

"Every star" lol...except Harden, Russ, AD, CP3, Dwight, guys with multiple Top 5 MVP finishes who are comparable to any stars from any era you say "didn't eat"...matter fact a starting 5 of Paul/Russ/Beard/AD/Dwight could probably beat a starting 5 of guys who didnt win a chip in any previous era...

 

[Trojan 24]

They definitely would...



"Every star" lol...except Harden, Russ, AD, CP3, Dwight, guys with multiple Top 5 MVP finishes who are comparable to any stars from any era you say "didn't eat"...matter fact a starting 5 of Paul/Russ/Beard/AD/Dwight could probably beat a starting 5 of guys who didnt win a chip in any previous era...

Besides AD/Beard I don't see those guys on Barley's tier. AD only like 25, he'll get one

 

[Erratic415]

Funny thing about Chuck is he hates analytics yet they have him ranked as like a Top 5ish player of all time.

The Eye test and ringz rankings he favors have him outside the Top 20.

Its like Joe Morgan. One of the sabermetrics based lists had him #1 all-time at 2B and talked about all the things he did that traditional stats didn’t account for. Morgan then went all these rants on how the sabermetricians are idiots and how all of those ranking him so high were wrong.

 

[murksiderock]

On topic, was Chuck really Top 5 of his era? It doesn't mean everything, but here's the Top 5 MVP finishes of guys in both eras he played in:

80s
Bird (9)
Magic (7)
Cap (5)
Moses/Doc (4)
Mike (3)
Hakeem/Nique/Gervin (2)

90s
Mike/Mailman (7)
Robinson/Ewing (5)
Hakeem (4)
Shaq/Chuck (3)
Duncan/Pippen/Magic (2)

I'm not sure Barkley makes an 80s or 90s Top 5, you have to really specify his years that he was Top 5:

1987-88 to 1992-93
Mike (6)
Chuck/Magic/Mailman/Ewing (4)
Drexler/Hakeem/Robinson (2)

If you start extending his years two years in either direction, Barkley isn't one of the Top 5 MVP getters, so at best it looks like you could stretch it from 1986-87 to 1993-94 and say he was a Top 5 player...

I have no dog in this fight, other than I've heard him called overrated by my father and I know this board tends to hype cats of previous eras beyond their actual worth. I know he's an All-Timer, but keep in mind I didnt see him. So in the 6-year period he was assuredly Top 5:

•25.9/11.6/4.1/1.6/0.8 (25.9/13.3/4.6/1.5/0.8 playoffs)
•.567 on 16 FG (.517 on 18 in playoffs)
•124 ORtg/106 DRtg (120/108 playoffs)
•26.8 PER, .246 WS48 (25.2/.207 playoffs)

•missed the postseason twice with two sub-40 win seasons
•one 50 win season, one 60 win season
•one run past the Semis ('93)

That's Chuck, 1987-93. Somebody compare this to 2013-19 James Harden and explain to me what makes Barkley better. Yall give Harden hella grief but yall gassing the fukk out of Barkley, I'm gonna need somebody to explain to me where the major difference in perception is coming from, though I think I know the answer already...

Barkley indeed had a Top 5 stretch but if anything he looks more like his era's Harden than anything else...

 

[Blackrogue]

Don’t ever mention Paul pierce next to Barkley again

who DIDNT know that chuck was top 5?

Draymond Green



A healthy draymond and the team is now slotted to be the first pick . Yet he thought somehow he's on chucks level..

 

[murksiderock]

Besides AD/Beard I don't see those guys on Barley's tier. AD only like 25, he'll get one

I got you, it is subjective. But so is the "everybody eats" argument, which can be applied objectively to every era but is only subjectively applied to the 2010s...

None of those guys are currently on Chuck's level but all of those guys are/were big stars at the peak of their games just like Chuck...

 

[Elim Garak]

Be 30 years late brehs.

 

[Saysumthinfunnymike]

Tryna throw Pierce in there . He is not on the level of Chuck

and Triple Single is several levels below Pierce so do the math

 

[Illeye buckmatic]

On topic, was Chuck really Top 5 of his era? It doesn't mean everything, but here's the Top 5 MVP finishes of guys in both eras he played in:

80s
Bird (9)
Magic (7)
Cap (5)
Moses/Doc (4)
Mike (3)
Hakeem/Nique/Gervin (2)

90s
Mike/Mailman (7)
Robinson/Ewing (5)
Hakeem (4)
Shaq/Chuck (3)
Duncan/Pippen/Magic (2)

I'm not sure Barkley makes an 80s or 90s Top 5, you have to really specify his years that he was Top 5:

1987-88 to 1992-93
Mike (6)
Chuck/Magic/Mailman/Ewing (4)
Drexler/Hakeem/Robinson (2)

If you start extending his years two years in either direction, Barkley isn't one of the Top 5 MVP getters, so at best it looks like you could stretch it from 1986-87 to 1993-94 and say he was a Top 5 player...

I have no dog in this fight, other than I've heard him called overrated by my father and I know this board tends to hype cats of previous eras beyond their actual worth. I know he's an All-Timer, but keep in mind I didnt see him. So in the 6-year period he was assuredly Top 5:

•25.9/11.6/4.1/1.6/0.8 (25.9/13.3/4.6/1.5/0.8 playoffs)
•.567 on 16 FG (.517 on 18 in playoffs)
•124 ORtg/106 DRtg (120/108 playoffs)
•26.8 PER, .246 WS48 (25.2/.207 playoffs)

•missed the postseason twice with two sub-40 win seasons
•one 50 win season, one 60 win season
•one run past the Semis ('93)

That's Chuck, 1987-93. Somebody compare this to 2013-19 James Harden and explain to me what makes Barkley better. Yall give Harden hella grief but yall gassing the fukk out of Barkley, I'm gonna need somebody to explain to me where the major difference in perception is coming from, though I think I know the answer already...

Barkley indeed had a Top 5 stretch but if anything he looks more like his era's Harden than anything else...

I'll explain the difference. Harden couldn't win a chip with Durant and Westbrook. Barkley was playing with bums most of his time with the sixers. Harden hasn't taken the rockets to the finals as the man in Houston. Barkley took the suns to the finals and lost to the goat.

 

[Cladyclad]

I'll explain the difference. Harden couldn't win a chip with Durant and Westbrook. Barkley was playing with bums most of his time with the sixers. Harden hasn't taken the rockets to the finals as the man in Houston. Barkley took the suns to the finals and lost to the goat.

Barkley couldn’t win with Dr J & Moses

or with Dream & Clyde

or with Clyde Dream & Pippen

 

[Houston911]

Draymond Green



A healthy draymond and the team is now slotted to be the first pick . Yet he thought somehow he's on chucks level..

draymond is the most overrated player in modern history

 

[Illeye buckmatic]

Barkley couldn’t win with Dr J & Moses

or with Dream & Clyde

or with Clyde Dream & Pippen

That Houston team was past their prime And had a ton of nagging injuries

 

[Cladyclad]

That Houston team was past their prime And had a ton of nagging injuries

Excuses