murksiderock
Superstar
What are you defining as the MJ era? I can see Chuck having a Top 5 run 87-93 but it's hard to envision him as the second best player for a prolonged period of time...
Damn Barkley really was a top 5 player back in the day
- Thread starter steph_harden
- Start date
What are you defining as the MJ era? I can see Chuck having a Top 5 run 87-93 but it's hard to envision him as the second best player for a prolonged period of time...
Supreme365
Superstar
lol Duncan is working all of them boys
Erratic415
Superstar
I mean they blew big leads both times. They had a 3-1 lead in 95’ with HCA and couldn’t close out. The poor FT shooting hurt them in that game 5.
When Wesley Person took that 3 at the end of regulation, I thought the series was over.
I think he was probably the 3rd best during his best seasons. First behind the 2 MJs. Magic won MVP during that one year (1989-90) when Barkley got more 1st place votes.
Maybe he was 2nd best during the season (92-93) he won MVP and lost to the Bulls in the finals. Olajuwon was a beast on both ends of the court though, and no longer always fighting with management and teammates. Olajuwon was a hothead his first few years.
The length of his run is irrelevant to what i said. I simply saying the second best player MJ ever encountered in their prime was Charles.
Erratic415
Superstar
Used to watch this all the time as a kid
murksiderock
Superstar
And I asked what are you defining as MJ's "era", because you didnt say "prime" until just now...
Mike played from '84 to '03, what exactly are you calling his "era" or his "prime"? You can't throw that out there on a sports discussion board without expecting someone to ask what you mean by it, you're acting like muhfukkas supposed to accept your word without context. It's a sports board fam, stop acting insulted I asked a question...
Hakeem is really the only person i can see being a good counter to that argument. Only reason i don't put him up there personally is because i feel like his two championship seasons were outliers. Like dude was great but he was putting up like 20 every year before that. Suddenly those two years he's putting up 30. then immediately falls back to 20 again after. i'm not accusing him of taking roids or anything, but he's clearly more likely to put up tim duncan numbers than he is Kareem numbers. Still all time great level though.
I'm not insulted, i just explained what i meant because you took what i said out of context. no big deal
murksiderock
Superstar
What was it about Chuck that made him better than Drexler, Robinson, Mailman, or Ewing to you guys? On the surface all those guys seem comparable to the best versions of Barkley, notwithstanding Dream and Magic as well during Barkley's hottest run...
Bruh Hakeem had monster stat lines before the chips. The scoring was a career high but in 89 Dream got 24 14 with 3 blocks 3 steals and 2 assists a night. In 90 he was at 25 14 4 2 and 3. The only reason he averaged more points in those title winning years is cause he played more minutes than ever and took more shots than he ever did before.
I always felt like Drexler and Ewing were just regular superstars on good teams. Not generational. I'd compare them to Towns and Booker. i'm gonna get alot of hate for that, but i felt like those two in particular were overrated. Mailman i felt had the benefit of playing next to a top 5 point guard his whole career. Robinson was great but couldn't lead his team to the same heights as chuck.
Last edited:
He's a center.
And no. If he was a PF, I would rate him right there with them.
Tim Duncan is not better than Malone, Barkley, and Garnett by any sizeable measure. They are all roughly in the same ballpark.
Oakley the human statue
