In there primes. IF they played one on one Who do you think would win. They both have good jump shots. Good back to the basket games Malone is stronger and is probably the better defender Barkley simply moves better and has better ball handling skills. Who do you think would win this game? While Malone was the best PF in the team setting . . . How much of that was predicated on Stockton being there? How would he fair in a one on one game? [yes . . I am leaning toward Barkley] Rocket River This was a debate among some friends
I'm like you, I lean toward Barkley for the speed, athleticism and dexterity. Malone had that too but I just see Barkley winning 2 out of 3.....close though
Depends on which Barkley. I actually think the Auburn/Philly version was better than the Phoenix one that won MVP. The earlier Barkley was unstoppable energy, could take the ball coast-to-coast, amazing leaping ability. When he lost some of that athleticism, he started falling in love with jump shots and 3 pointers.
isn't that what you're suppose to do as your athleticism digresses? he still had his post game during those years.
I'm going to say as much as this pains me is... Malone. Malone for his time in the league, was a prototypical power forward... great post scorer, good mid range shooter, pretty decent passer, longevity, better conditioned, and pretty good defender. I hate to say this about Barkley, but that's what drops off between them. Barkley has the edge in rebounding and off the perimeter skills. Athleticism is almost a wash, because I think Barkley was more athletic to begin their careers, but Malone held onto his for a bit longer. http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/h2h_finder.cgi?request=1&p1=malonka01&p2=barklch01
His post game was still very good, and he could draw fouls with the best of them, demanded a double team, and was an excellent passer out of the post... but too often he'd let the defense off the hook by shooting 3's or ill-advised fadeaways. It would be one thing if his shooting improved as he got older and less athletic (like Hakeem's did), but it didn't. That being said, Barkley could always create his own shot... Malone, not so much.
Maybe people don't remember how good Barkley used to be. In their primes, I think Sir Charles takes Malone 1 on 1. Barkley can take him from top of the key, post up and shoot the long ball. Malone, not having Stockton spoon feed him the ball 5ft. from the basket would not be as good. How about Barkley/KJ vs. Malone/Stockton 2on2?
They both suck cause they didn't win championships. Chris Bosh is a 2 time champion. He is better. That's how people debate sports now, right?
Malone is the best finisher in the history of the NBA. Key word is finisher, which means he needs someone to get him the ball. Although he's not great at it, Barkley can actually create his own shot. Malone would get destroyed by any big in a one on one situation if they can handle the ball. In a game to 11, Barkley would beat Malone 11-3. Now if you take what another poster said and made it 2v2 Stockton/Malone vs KJ/Barkley...Stockton/Malone would win fairly easy since Barkley can't defend the PnR. Stockton/Malone could win almost any 2v2 matchup.
