Didn't think I'd have to explain this but Barkley just isn't the defender that Draymond is. It literally changes the whole make up of GS' roster in that they wouldn't be able to go small and maintain their defensive presence. They'd be playing 2 bigs......which means there's no death lineup with them going 5 out.
I'll tell you one thing, when the Suns were up 98-94 with 40 seconds to go in G6 of the 93 Finals......Draymond would have been there to stop the ball as opposed to allowing a wide open layup from MJ.
I already have it in the media gallery
MJ stays mad at Horace Grant because he still will not let MJ walk all over him, billions or no billions.He had the gamewinning block too
Name some teams that won a championship without a top 10 defense...the internet is a wild place lmao.
Maybe, or he could have done some dumb shyt like him going for that steal against Siakam in Game 6 instead of just playing D straight up
The argument isn't about them replacing each other on the other's team. Draymond wasn't the scorer and couldn't lead the Suns like Barkley could. They both fit their own teams better.
The great thing about team sports is that fit means so much. Charles Barkley is a better individual player than Draymond but if you replaced Draymond for Barkley the Warriors are much worse and probably never become the dynasty they were over the past 4 seasons.
Look man we will just say you won I can't take this shyt seriously.Name some teams that won a championship without a top 10 defense...
Replacing Dray with Chuck takes the Warriors out the top 10 defenses
Basketball is about team fit and chemistry
Crazy thing is Ahmad made almost a handful of probowls, and all is a know for is being a Jordan groupie
Don't forget inside stuff lol.Crazy thing is Ahmad made almost a handful of probowls, and all is a know for is being a Jordan groupie