How good would Charles Barkley be today?

[freshinthehouse]

lebron wouldn't look that good

if we are doing throw back players how about
kevin willis=dwight howard

I love me some Kevin Willis, but the dude had T-Rex arms.  He wasn't close to the defensive presence that Howard is.

[freshinthehouse]

And on the subject of Barkley, on the court he would be fine.  It's not like he played in the 50s or anything.  Dude would still be a 25/12 guy in his prime.  He didn't play any defense then, so I doubt he would play any now.

[dark_lord]

barkley would be the same beast today as he was in his prime

[86MaxwellSmart]

Robert Parish would be the Best Center in the League now.

[slamtheking]

Barkley would still be a top player in the league.  Look what Faried can do and he's not the offensive player Barkley is.  with the poor boxout skills in the league today, Barkley would be a force on the O boards

[Snakehead]

Barkley would still be great but the media thing is important, I think he would be treated like DeMarcus Cousins is.

[CFAN38]

Be a top 3 player

I agree, we would be talking about Lebron, Chuck and KD as the cream of the current NBA.

[bdm860]

I'm still amazed Barkley dominated when he did.  What he did at his size just blows my mind.

Just for some context, Barkley, at 36, was still playing in 2000, and put up 15/10/3.  In '99 at 35, he put up 16/12/5. 

At 6'4", age 35+, against guys like Shaq, Garnett, Kidd, Duncan, Kobe, Pierce, Nowitzki, etc.

Not like dude played in a completely different era.  If anything, he'd probably be better than he was then if he played today.

[D.o.s.]

Lots of great responses here--Chuck was one of my favorite players when I (and he, I suppose) were younger, so my biases are always going to be pro-Sir Charles.

I've always thought that in light of his half-time presence and his general gregarious character, his one-of-a-kind game got overlooked a little bit. It's not often you can find a guy who can go coast-to-coast as scarily (hey, I was a little kid) as he could and still post up like a machine.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TKmpQyo9muU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cAdMW4Hi8yI



Re the stretch comment--it's really this: do you guys think modern NBA coaches would still let him play the 4 and hang around in the low post? Or would they stick him at the three? I honestly don't know, because I wasn't aware of coaching strategies at the time.

[Finkelskyhook]

barkley would be the same beast today as he was in his prime

+1

[KG Living Legend]

 Better no doubt.

[Mazingerz]

One player he reminds me of is Sully. Not a player with great height, but with overall box-out skills and with a high-intensity motor.

[Boris Badenov]

How would the round mound of rebound stand up to today's NBA?

How would people handle the idea of a 6'4 PF in today's stretch-four happy game?

Would he eat better?

Would the media eat him alive?

1. I think he'd be better offensively and rebounding-wise, honestly, given how few people could guard him now compared to back then in the days of the traditional PF. He might struggle more on D.

2. See above. Barkley was actually a decent shooter by mid-career, for what that's worth, so he could stretch the D a bit himself.

3. No, but he would probably be on the juice and therefore leaner and maybe bigger.

4. What a great question. It'd be interesting to be sure, and I'm sure there are dozens of scandalous events he participated in that never saw the light of day before the internet. Think about the early career stuff (spitting on a fan). And his later-career reputation for being a party animal. On the other hand I think the media might have given him more of a platform for his political views (which are somewhat non-traditional I guess).

"Leaner" isn't an accurate statement when it comes to steroids. Certain ones give you less water retention than others, but none make you leaner. That's done through diet and cardio. Your BF% may be lowered, but that's because your muscle mass has increased given you a lower percentage when numbers are calculated even though the BF amount is the same.

As for Barkley, he would absolutely dominate. He was an athletic freak in his prime who could take you off the dribble with a great first step, use his strength to muscle you for position, and finish effectively with his really good leaping ability.

All steroids are not the same... Some are taken to get leaner.

Incorrect. Some, like winstrol, anavar, primobolan, etc., provide less water retention that others, but none get you leaner. Name one that does. Now if you're taking about clenbuterol or cytomel, those aren't steroids.

Perhaps you should go and correct the Wikipedia entry on PEDs:

Lean mass builders drive or amplify the growth of muscle and lean body mass; sometimes they're used to reduce body fat. They can also reduce the time it takes an athlete to recover from an injury. This class of drugs includes anabolic steroids, xenoandrogens, beta-2 agonists, selective androgen receptor modulators (SARMs), and various human hormones, most notably human growth hormone, as well as some of their precursors.[3] Performance-enhancing drugs are also found in animals as synthetic growth hormone.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Performance-enhancing_drug

[syfy9]

One player he reminds me of is Sully. Not a player with great height, but with overall box-out skills and with a high-intensity motor.

Allen Iverson sorta reminds me of Jordan Crawford.

[Celtics17]

Barkley would be great today just as he was back in the 80's. He was such a unique player. He would be the best rebounder in today's game and it's top power forward too. Lebron would have the upper body strength to deal with Barkley but Sir Charles would definitely have the lower body advantage.

I still remember watch Barkley pick Shaq up and drop him. Granted he didn't pick Shaq up too far but he did get him off the ground. Very few players have ever challenged Shaq like that and no one in today's game would.