Does Charles Barkley realize he was small?
- Thread starter KOBE
- Start date
GoddamnyamanProf
Countdown to Armageddon
Nothing approaching the sheer idiocy of "Klay Thompson is pretty much as good a rebounder as Dennis Rodman"There's some wild shyt being said in this thread.
God you're a joke.
Nothing approaching the sheer idiocy of "Klay Thompson is pretty much as good a rebounder as Dennis Rodman"
God you're a joke.
You have the ALL-TIME WOAT reading comprehension. It's not Klay Thompson you dumb fukk - it's Tristan Thompson.
See:
Even the dude I was arguing with said it was a good point. Another L for you @GoddamnyamanProf
@GoddamnyamanProf your dumbass even put it in quotation marks as if I said "Klay Thompson". Why the fukk would I mean Klay Thompson as if he has the ability to get FOUR offensive rebounds a game?
GoddamnyamanProf
Countdown to Armageddon
@GoddamnyamanProf your dumbass even put it in quotation marks as if I said "Klay Thompson". Why the fukk would I mean Klay Thompson as if he has the ability to get FOUR offensive rebounds a game?
Ok I'll take that L, I havent read a word of this discussion. I only saw yet another poster frustrated with your pointless filibustering (as you know I no longer waste a minute on your posts - the Art Barr treatment) and felt empathy. You caught feelings w a neg as per usual, and you've been riding GS more than secondthoughts as of late, so when I saw you raving about "Thompson" and comparing him favorably to the greatest rebounder of all time in a thread about Bulls v. Warriors...well, easy to see how I arrived at the incorrect conclusion.
You're still wrong of course, but less so.
And on that note, I'll see myself out
Nothing new here.
Ok I'll take that L
Actually @ghostwriterx and I were having a civil back and forth discussion. This is the problem with you, you NEVER read posts properly. This is how you get into trouble and start interpreting things differently - not in the manner in which they're conveyed. 99.9% of this shyt is started from you not reading properly. This petty ass agenda shyt of yours wouldn't exist if you READ my shyt properly.
No I'm not wrong. YOU'RE WRONG. There isn't much difference between TT's current offensive rebounding ability and Rodman's offensive rebounding ability in Chicago. The STATS - you know those things called facts - state that it's true:
Thompson averaged 4.4 offensive rebounds in 36 minutes last postseason
Rodman averaged 5.4 offensive rebounds in 34 minutes in the 95/96 postseason
Rodman averaged 3.1 offensive rebounds in 28 minutes in the 96/97 postseason
Rodman averaged 4.7 offensive rebounds in 34 minutes in the 97/98 postseason
GoddamnyamanProf
Countdown to Armageddon
Again, didnt read
You dudes have absolutely no awareness on how the game has evolved do you?
This muh'fukka is stretching this shyt to players in the late 50s mopping the floor with today's generation - failing to realize that in the late 50s and early/mid 60s there was a [unspoken] quota on how many black players were allowed on each team. You're saying that a period where the most physically capable of human beings weren't all allowed to play would mop the floor against the fastest, strongest, most athletic players in the history of mankind 50 years later - with all the generational framework of kids starting earlier, advanced medicine and technology?
Even saying the early 2000s would mop the floor with this era as if the East wasn't in its worst state.
You also have to weigh into account the lack of talent Oscar played against, you have to weight into account that there were only 8-10 teams in the league, you have to weight into account that Oscar wouldn't be averaging 40+ minutes in the league today and he wouldn't be dominating the ball like he did in the 60s. There's no team in the league today that would allow a player to player all those minutes and dominate the ball like that. He'd be playing with and against players that were not only equal to him but vastly superior.
If he played in this era, he wouldn't come close to putting up those numbers. Wilt wouldn't put up the same numbers as well. It's nearly impossible to put up stats like that in today's environment - the operative to win games, build balanced teams, widespread talent and offensive/defensive schemes wouldn't allow it.
@Malta dudes are going crazy in here.
Dude said players from the 50s
Fam, anything from the past is better than the present apparently.
Nothing new here.
Actually @ghostwriterx and I were having a civil back and forth discussion. This is the problem with you, you NEVER read posts properly. This is how you get into trouble and start interpreting things differently - not in the manner in which they're conveyed. 99.9% of this shyt is started from you not reading properly. This petty ass agenda shyt of yours wouldn't exist if you READ my shyt properly.
No I'm not wrong. YOU'RE WRONG. There isn't much difference between TT's current offensive rebounding ability and Rodman's offensive rebounding ability in Chicago. The STATS - you know those things called facts - state that it's true:
Thompson averaged 4.4 offensive rebounds in 36 minutes last postseason
Rodman averaged 5.4 offensive rebounds in 34 minutes in the 95/96 postseason
Rodman averaged 3.1 offensive rebounds in 28 minutes in the 96/97 postseason
Rodman averaged 4.7 offensive rebounds in 34 minutes in the 97/98 postseason
Those are not the stats you go by moron. You go by ORB%. Meaning of all their offensive rebound opportunities, what percentage did Rodman/Tristant get? You cant go by your stats for obvious reasons - it doesn't take into account the slower pace of the 90's game, relative minutes played and the like. If you go by ORB% of Rodmans first Bulls playoff run and Tristans Cavs last run - it's not close. I understand why you don't like the more meaningful ORB% because it destroys your argument.
Also delete the last two playoff appearances for Rodman. On his second Bulls playoff run he was playing on one knee and the last run he was damn near 40 (and yet his ORB% was still higher than any Tristan will probably ever put up).
Last edited:
Here's the thing - even despite Rodman's and TT's roles being similar - the eras in which they played in are different. Rodman had the benefit of positioning himself on the weakside/strongside, waiting and anticipating which way the ball would bounce off the rim on offense - in a more ISO orientated league. In today's PnR heavy/3-pt orientated league - Thompson doesn't have the same opportunities to camp on either side of the rim to wait for a rebound. They're A LOT of times he's setting a pick on the perimeter for a 3-pt shot, a drive to the rim, or a kick out opportunity. Or he rolls out on a pop and positions himself for perimeter shot - or just to provide spacing. Rodman hardly EVER did this. He was always typically by the rim in all offensive sets. Then you have to add in the pace of play, the transition plays, plays within the first third of the shotclock - all which take away a certain portion of offensive rebound opportunities. Which is why you can't go by ORB% - because it's not more meaningful.
We're not going to delete shyt. Don't come in mid-convo trying to change an argument you were never involved in. This was a discussion on how Rodman would dominate this current Warriors squad on the offensive boards - I used Thompson as a reference point as there wasn't much difference between their offensive rebounding abilities and style of play (crashing the boards). Which there isn't.
Last edited:
GoddamnyamanProf
Countdown to Armageddon
He's mad that you dapped my posts
You calling me out just cause you saw me viewing the thread?
Gil starting shyt for literally no reason now
Very feminine behavior, he does it all the time. 
Makavalli
Sinister is a system
Because they proved him wrong. Jump shooting team eon the title and looks like they will do it again. The test is how they do against the new spurs
anyone that dapped this post never seen barkley play.Like this fukker doesn't seem to realize he was killing teams while being a 6'6" forward, which happens to be the same height as Draymond Green(who is shytting on just about everybody as well) and Rodman himself was only 6'7". He was stout and bulky, but he was still "small" in terms of height. Draymond is no scorer, obviously, but the guy can do just about everything else on the court and does add a streaky three point shot to the mix.
And I don't even think these Warriors would take those Bulls, but he actually brought up "who would guard dennis rodman".
The bit at the end is just icing on the cake as we all know what a hypocrite he loves to be.
charles was small in height but wide as hell and heavy as hell. so in essence there was nothing small about chuck. draymond and chuck are not in the same stratoshpere PERIOD> the didnt play the same. dray is shooting 3's and making solid stand still passes. chuck would shoot a few 3's, drive hard and post people up to death. draymond is not on the block posting up 7 foot dudes in a league where bigs are real. this league has mostly fake power forwards with litte to no power.