In contrast to other professional sports, the NBA often showcases former players who appear critical of the modern game. A case in point is Charles Barkley, who voiced his opinions on the Bill Simmons podcast. The ongoing debate over the greatest point guard ever, Stephen Curry or Magic Johnson, prompted Barkley to express his belief that the Bad Boy Pistons would have overwhelmed Curry.

Barkley’s argument that today’s players couldn’t cope with the physicality of past eras is flawed for two reasons. Firstly, players like Curry are tougher than Barkley acknowledges. Curry, officially listed at 6’2″ and around 195-200 pounds, compares favorably in size to top point guards from the past like John Stockton, Kevin Johnson, Mark Price, Kenny Smith, John Starks, and Reggie Miller, who thrived against the Bad Boy Pistons.

Secondly, Barkley overlooks how the game has evolved. Players like Bill Laimbeer wouldn’t fare well against the shooting and spacing of the Warriors. High pick-and-rolls would exploit Laimbeer’s limitations. While some of the older bigs like Rick Mahorn and James Edwards might struggle, Dennis Rodman’s versatility would be an asset in any era.

It’s important to note that athletes in all sports today are more physically capable due to advancements in training, science, and diet. While the late 1980s/early 1990s NBA was undoubtedly more physical, the Bad Boy Pistons’ success is a testament to their place in history. However, Curry and the Warriors represent their era’s pinnacle too. Criticizing the current era to elevate past ones is intellectually unproductive. Both Curry and Barkley would excel in any era, and it’s time for NBA analysts to move beyond nostalgic comparisons.