This topic is a spin-off from the Michael Jordan thread of last week. In the excellent discussion of that thread a mini-debate broke out as to how Charles Barkley compares to Kevin Garnett. The gist of the brief debate was to question whether Barkley was enough better than Garnett offensively to make them comparable in value as overall players despite Garnett's huge defensive advantages. The thing is, though, to me there is a much better comp for Barkley in this generation than Garnett: Dirk Nowitzki. To see why, let's take a closer look at the elite big men of the past 30 years.
Since the NBA/ABA merger in 1976 there have been 11 power forwards or centers to win the NBA MVP award: Bill Walton, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Moses Malone, Charles Barkley, Hakeem Olajuwon, David Robinson, Karl Malone, Shaquille O'Neal, Tim Duncan, Kevin Garnett, and Dirk Nowitzki. Eight of those 11 players have won NBA championships, one has been to the Finals twice without a win, and two have only been to the Finals once and came away empty. Similarly, nine of those 11 players have made the NBA All Defensive Team at least twice each (a combined 61 All Defensive Teams between them) and two of them have never made the All Defensive Team at all. I don't think it's a coincidence that the only two big men MVPs to go 0-for-1 in the Finals are the same two that have never made an All Defensive Team: Barkley and Nowitzki.
Most inner-circle NBA superstars have complete games at both ends of the floor, but this is especially vital among big men because one of their primary jobs is to be the foundation for the defense. Perimeter players are more natural offense initiators than bigs, but it is very difficult to have a championship-caliber defense without some sort of defensive post presence.
Barkley and Nowitzki are both brilliant offense producers, both at the very top of that list of big men MVPs at that end of the floor, but their defensive lacks are a big reason for their teams not getting over the hump. Consider that both Barkley and Nowitzki played with a laundry-list of good teammates in their careers, and that their teams were generally excellent on offense but shaky on defense. Both Barkley and Nowitzki led championship-caliber teams to the Finals with home court advantage and much better records than their opponents, but in both cases the opponent had a dominant scoring wing that they just couldn't slow down. Think about what Jordan and Dwyane Wade did against the Suns and Mavs, then contrast that with what the Duncan-led Spurs and Garnett-led Celtics did to LeBron James and Kobe Bryant in their last two championship runs. Barkley's and Nowitzki's offensive games are wonderful, but they weren't as potent as the wings that they faced and since they couldn't help slow down those wings defensively they continue to be ringless.
Now obviously, Barkley and Nowitzki had very different styles of play. Barkley was a banger that dominated up close and on the glass while Dirk is more of a finesse scorer that can dominate from long range. That said, just like their top-end results, their individual stats are also very similar. Barkley filled the box score up just a bit more, especially on the boards, but several of the advanced stats illustrate how similar Barkley and Nowitzki have been in their careers overall. I wish that 82games.com had stats back to Barkley's time, but in their absence the basketball-reference.com stats go back further and make for easier comparisons through time.
Nowitzki : 117 Offense Rating, 103 Defense Rating, 137.9 win shares (98.6 offense, 39.3 defense), PER 23.9
Barkley (first 11 seasons): 120 ORtg, 105 DRtg, 140 win shares (98.4 offense, 41.6 defense), PER 25.1
You can argue which one you think is better…I suspect Barkley would probably win the debate, but when I consider how they played the game, their overall impact, and their overall results I think that Nowitzki is the closest thing that this generation has to Barkley.