All-no-titles team: Power Forward

[elindholm]

Who is the best power forward never to win an NBA championship? I'll do the other positions as I get around to them. Current players are eligible only if they have reached the stage of their careers where winning a title seems very unlikely.

Not too many nominees for this one...

 

[Cheesebeef]

Barkley.

I feel like Malone only ever got to the Finals because pretty much everyone good around him in his era retired or were shells of themselves by the time they got there. I think he was 34 and 35 by then and Hakeem, Barkley were done, the Payton/Kemp team imploded and the Lakers were too young and hadn't ripened yet. They found that sweet spot in between the great teams of the 90's and the Shaq/Duncan era where they were the last team standing from that era. Otherwise, the Jazz continually got their asses kicked by better teams during Stockton/Malone's prime.

 

[SirStefan32]

I am going to go with Barkley, but Malone is not too far behind, in my opinion. Webber was a good player, but he did not have the nastiness that the other two exhibited. Nobody was ever afraid of C-Webb, but plenty of players were terrified of Barkley and Malone.
I would have liked to see Malone play without Stockton in his prime (Lakers years don't count) and see if he did just as well. I am a big Stockton/ Malone fan, but I am never sure if one made the other or if they were both just that good.
On the plus side for Malone, if I remember correctly, he was probably the most durable big man since I remember following basketball (Granted, that's not all that long.)

Again, I'd take Barkley, but in my opinion Malone is probably just as good. I am probably voting for Barkley because I am a homer. If two players are pretty much equal, I think it's fine to be a homer and pick the one from your team.

 

[HooverDam]

This is a Suns board, so I'm sure we'll lean towards Barkley. I'll take Barkley over Malone in a one game, or one year sample. I think at their respective peaks, Barkley was better. Malone was in better shape and played at a high level longer though, so if you were going back in time and deciding who to pick for your franchise you might take Malone. But if I'm taking a team for a hypothetical pick up game or 1 season run, give me the Chuckwagon.

 

[Suns_fan69]

I'm surprised at how close the vote is currently it being a Suns board and all. In his prime chuck was just an absolute terror, more so than Karl IMO. His last couple years at Philly and first couple in Phoenix cement it for me.

 

[SirStefan32]

I'm surprised at how close the vote is currently it being a Suns board and all. In his prime chuck was just an absolute terror, more so than Karl IMO. His last couple years at Philly and first couple in Phoenix cement it for me.

It's probably because Malone was an absolute terror for 17 years as opposed to Chuck's 10. His durability and consistency is still unmatched. Malone was MUCH better defensively. My memory might be off, but I am fairly sure Malone made an all-D team once or twice while Barkley was AWFUL on D.

I wish I could find stats for head to head Barkley vs. Malone match ups. I remember some great battles, and while I think Malone would probably win if we compared their entire careers (including Barkley playing 2nd/3rd fiddle to Hakeem, Clyde, and Scotty in Houston) Karl would win. If we compare them in Barkley's prime, I'd think we'd see that Barkley outplayed Malone.

 

[Mainstreet]

Charles Barkley.

 

[Billy Bob]

Sir Round Mound of Rebound

 

[ajcardfan]

Barkley. Because he OWNED Malone head-to-head.

 

[mojorizen7]

The Chuckster. The Round mound of rebound.
Sir Charles baby!

 

[Ronin]

I have a soft spot for finesse players.....so I'll go with Chris Webber.

 

[BC867]

I have a soft spot for finesse players.....so I'll go with Chris Webber.

Finesse players have soft spots, too. Their bodies.

 

[Mulli]

delete

 

[TucsonDevil]

I'm a little surprised by the amounts of homers we have. Karl Malone was an amazing PF, second leading scorer in NBA history - never got hurt, two MVPs (one while Jordan was in the league at his top), and was always a starter after his rookie season. Chuck was awesome and fun, and deserves to be in the Hall-of-Fame, but Karl was better.

Both Stockton and Malone got very little run being from Utah when compared to the other stars in the league.

 

[Brian in Mesa]

I'm a little surprised by the amounts of homers we have. Karl Malone was an amazing PF, second leading scorer in NBA history - never got hurt, two MVPs (one while Jordan was in the league at his top), and was always a starter after his rookie season. Chuck was awesome and fun, and deserves to be in the Hall-of-Fame, but Karl was better.

Both Stockton and Malone got very little run being from Utah when compared to the other stars in the league.

His knee injury likely cost the Lakers a title.

Totally different team when he was healthy that season.

 

[elindholm]

I'm a little surprised by the amounts of homers we have. Karl Malone was an amazing PF, second leading scorer in NBA history - never got hurt, two MVPs (one while Jordan was in the league at his top), and was always a starter after his rookie season.

I don't think you have to be a homer to put Barkley above Malone. Barkley's career wasn't as long, but he also "beat" Jordan for an MVP award, and his peak was better than Malone's.

For me, Barkley's rebounding, especially on the offensive end, gives him the edge. Malone never averaged better than 12 rebounds in season, nor better than 3.5 offensive rebounds. Barkley's career averages are 12 and 4, and his offensive putback "and-ones" could be huge game-changers.

 

[BC867]

His knee injury likely cost the Lakers a title.

Totally different team when he was healthy that season.

To be fair, Malone was in the twilight of his career on the Lakers. 'Close to running his Larry Miller car dealership full-time.

 

[Cheesebeef]

His knee injury likely cost the Lakers a title.

Totally different team when he was healthy that season.

that totally different team got the snot kicked out of it 3 of 4 times by the Pistons when Malone was healthy that season (2 in the regular season and once in Game 1 of the Finals), with the one W coming by way of a 30 foot prayer by Kobe in Game 2 at the last second that sent that game to OT. The Pistons dominated that Lakers team no matter who was on the floor that season.

 

[Covert Rain]

I don't think you have to be a homer to put Barkley above Malone. Barkley's career wasn't as long, but he also "beat" Jordan for an MVP award, and his peak was better than Malone's.

For me, Barkley's rebounding, especially on the offensive end, gives him the edge. Malone never averaged better than 12 rebounds in season, nor better than 3.5 offensive rebounds. Barkley's career averages are 12 and 4, and his offensive putback "and-ones" could be huge game-changers.

I could buy this argument as well. Karl was more of a prototypical PF and a bruiser at times. Barkley at his peak was phenomenal. There is no way a guy his size (his size was overstated) should have been that good of a rebounder and been able to massacre PFs much bigger. Offensively he for much of his career was absolutely unguardable. He was listed at 6'6" but he was no bigger than 6'4". My brother in law stood next to him and they were the exact same height.

 

[dreamcastrocks]

I'm going with Karl, but it is closer than the Stockton/Nash debate.

 

[BC867]

I could buy this argument as well. Karl was more of a prototypical PF and a bruiser at times. Barkley at his peak was phenomenal. There is no way a guy his size (his size was overstated) should have been that good of a rebounder and been able to massacre PFs much bigger. Offensively he for much of his career was absolutely unguardable. He was listed at 6'6" but he was no bigger than 6'4". My brother in law stood next to him and they were the exact same height.

That's true! The Chuckster, once he became a star, measured 6'4 1/2".

That is why I have been saying that, whereas height is important for a good Center or Power Forward (when a team is smart enough to play two big men), bulk is more important than height.

When Wes Unseld (6'7-245) and the Big E, Elvin Hayes (6'9"-235), played side by side on the Bullets as their own version of Twin Towers, Unseld was clearly the Center. He had the bulk.

 

[TucsonDevil]

I don't think you have to be a homer to put Barkley above Malone. Barkley's career wasn't as long, but he also "beat" Jordan for an MVP award, and his peak was better than Malone's.

For me, Barkley's rebounding, especially on the offensive end, gives him the edge. Malone never averaged better than 12 rebounds in season, nor better than 3.5 offensive rebounds. Barkley's career averages are 12 and 4, and his offensive putback "and-ones" could be huge game-changers.

Barkley was never the same dominate player he was after the 93 Finals. I couldn't ever explain it, but then I saw the 84 Draft Special. Did anyone else watch that and hear the admission that Barkley gave about Jordan? He said, "walking off the court, for the first time in my life I had to admit that someone was just better than me." That shocked me, and it explained a lot - as to why I never again saw the same Barkley that starred down David Robinson for the jumper at the end of a playoff game...

Malone lost to Jordan, and immediately went back to the Finals the next year to try and exact revenge - and his team was better that second year.

I don't claim that Malone was miles ahead of Barkley, but I do give him a slight nod. Malone was a machine keeping his body fit and ready - IMO, this helped him avoid nagging injuries.