Who was a better player in their prime...Charles Barkley vs. Kevin Durant?

Dislike Durant for multiple reasons, primarily for joining a team that just beat him for a cheap ring in exchange for his soul, but that's because he is a phenomenal talent who is blessed with otherworldly wingspan and height to match.

No disrespect to Barkley, but he isn't on the same level. You could make a case that Durant was the best player in the NBA during certain years, in spite of the media often sucking at the teets of the more marketable Lebron and Curry.

 

It's a question because all-time greatest lists rank them similarly.. like within ~5 players

Durant's scoring skills are as good as Barkley's rebounding skills

Barkley's scoring skills skills are far better Durant's rebounding

Both are average at best defensively and neither are particularly clutch

Durant didn't win anything until he teamed up with a championship squad

Durant might be better perhaps, but the comparison is legitimate

 

This where you lose me, Durant is certainly not average at his peak and Barkley was always below average and a liability later in his career, Durant has never been a liability.

Rebounding is nowhere near as valuable as scoring as seen by Drummond being able to get 20 rebounds a game yet is a journeyman.

The comparison is not legitimate if you actually look at it without a bias.

 

I can agree on the defensive angle.

Drummond is a bad example because his offense is beyond wack. I'm not sure how he interacts with teammates and management but he might have similar problems as Dwight. He might break the record for most franchises played for

 

Offensively Durant is better overall than Barkley being he has range out to the 3pt. Barkley would shoot the 3 just to keep teams honest. Barkley's defense is a bit underrated. Rebounds count as defense and he was a double digit rebounding machine amongst trees and averaging like above 1.5 steals in his prime years. Think of what he could do in today's NBA. His offense may get a boost playing against smaller players in this era but with zone, his post game could be neutralized by double teams before he gets the ball but I think he would offensive rebound at a higher clip in today's NBA which means he gets more attempts on offense. He was an offensive rebounding machine. Up there with Malone, Rodman. I'm really biased as I love Barkley so I'm picking him. I think his overall skillset can keep you in a game, whereas Durant if he goes cold offensively, has issues contributing on the other end. So do you want the silky sports car or do you want the rugged utility truck. I've always been a hustle blue collar player so Barkley is my choice.

 

Barkley has better hair

 

Who cares who the better player was, what really matters is who the better person was.

 

Charles can enforce his will except on MJ. He's more injury prone though due to his size and type of game. To be fair with Durant, he has a lot of credit to his rings even if he joined his nemesis just to win.

 

Lol KD's scoring and Bsrkley's rebounding arr nowhere near comparable.

You forget Barkley was rebounding against guys in his era...who are generally inferior to guys in KD's era.

Where are all the 6'6 superstar power forwards in today's NBA? Its not like there is a lack of that in NCAA, they're just no longer good enough.

Barkley would be somewhere between Draymond, Randle and Zion in today's NBA. None of thise guys are considered as good or even near KD.

 

That's shortchanging a former MVP by a lot. Today's players have more shooting and skills, hence the league make rules to protect them. The 90s games are based more on physical play, so players like Durant would struggle more in that era too.

 

Barkley had to go up against the Mahorns and the Rodmans. He was in a much tougher league and generation. KD's era players are all soft.

Barkey was a freak of nature at 6'6". Hence the HOF status. The bigs in todays game are relegated to the perimeter to watch the guards dribble dribble dribble until they shoot. Much softer NBA.

 

Downplaying Barkley's rebounding might be the worst sports argument ever

He was 6'5'' (shorter than Jordan) outrebounding guys 4+ inches taller than him

He's a bigger anomaly size-wise than 6'10'' Durant because there's more comparable players within KD's height than Barkley

 

Its only possible in the past no longer possible in the present. In the past players werent as athletic as they are todsy so Barkley can rely on his quickness and mass to gobble up rebounds. He probably still be a good rebounder today but wouldnt dominate rebounding or even be called the round mound of rebound (maybe just get called round like Zion).

The worst possible sports argument is downplaying the effects of globalization, technology and training. The average player in the 80s wouldnt even make it to the GLeague today.

I dont care if Barkley is more an anomaly than KD point is KD would dominate any era past or present while Barkley wouldnt dominate rebounding today like he did in the past. Cant imagine him out rebounding Jokic, Giannis and Embiid.

 

Being soft is a choice. Being athletic is not a choice.

Players today are soft because the refs crack down on physicality. But if refs allowed physicality again players today can adjust and play by the old rules. You watch Celtics vs Bucks? Pretty sure Giannis or prime Lebron can be as physical as players in the 80s if they wanted to.

OTH majority of Barkley's eras players wont be good enough to make it in today's NBA because in todays NBA you cant out tough or out grit your opponent you can only out talent or outskill them. Lots of these guys arent mobile enough to guard on the perimeter and on offense they just know mid range so they'll be exploited by today's modern NBA. They also arent as athletic so most of the time they'll have resort to handchecks just to keep up to their opponent which is illegal nowadays.

People arguing 80s players are somehow better thsn 2020s players (in general) just dont understand how progress works.

What does HOF have anything to with their playing ability? You know who is in the general HOf? Sun Tzu. You know who will be slaughtered by a random US marine 1on1? Sun Tzu.

Lots of players who arent in the HOF would dominate in the 80s incouding guys like Paul George, Jimmy Butler and Bradley Beal.

 

The improved globalization, technology, and training of today's game would only make 80's players better if they played today

The entire argument is relative. Any player of any era played against the same players/rules who had access to the same things their opponent did

Draymond would never play PF in the 80's. He'd better improve his shooting skills

 

The entire thread is talking about better player in their primes. Barkley didnt have the tech KD did and at the same time he never fought against the better opponents KD did. Therefore KD is the better player. Whether you put KD in 2022 or 1984 he's still be better than Barkley. Thats cuz he is 6'10 wing with shooting touch. It aint that hard.

At the end of the day KD is a 6'10 freak and Barkley us a 6'5 freak. They are both freaks but KD is taller, more skilled and probably more athletic as well.

The globalization of NBA means the quality of NBA players increased drastically even disregarding technology and training. Guys like Giannis, Doncic even Dirk got exposed to basketball early and so were able to get in the league. But them going in the league means 3 local NCAA arent able to go in the league, multiply that X amount of times thats why the competition today is a lot tougher than in the 80s because in the 80s, bball was still a fringe sport worldwide. Almost every player in the 80s came from the NCAA, nowadays only 1.7% of NCAA players are able to get an NBA contract. Thats shows how tough the competition has become and how much better the players are now compared to the 80s.

Draymond? Draymond would beast in the 80s he'd be Barkley but with playmaking and 3 pt shooting. And defense too. His lack of speed and athleticism wouldnt matter since he can just hand check everybody. He has also no qualms playing dirty and landing hard shots on everyone so he'd fit right in.

 

Globalization has given the league more options, but there's also more teams now and larger rosters than the 80's

Stop comparing today's nutrition and training then projecting Durant's greatness 40 years ago. You're contradicting your own argument

I remember talking to you about these topics a few years ago. "Jordan is just an overhyped product of marketing". Your words

There was not 6'6'' PFs in the 80's NBA -- much less ones that reached GOAT rebounder arguments -- regardless if they existed in college

I'm not saying Barkley or KD was better. I'm saying it's a legit conversation

 

KD's "best player in certain seasons" has less credence when MJ and Olajuwon are present

Talent and skillset aside, two of those guys are clearly more clutch than the other one