Posted: Tue Sep 19, 2017 11:42 am Post subject: Re: Tracy McGrady does not belong in the hall of fame
dubaholic1 wrote:
There. I said it.
Maybe he belongs in the Hall of Kind of Sometimes Good Players, but certainly not HOF material.
And not because he didn't get a ring. Not that.
He was pretty good, some of the time. He was not a legend and he wont be remembered as a legend, and to me that is what it means to be in the Hall.
^^Things people say to get a rise out of others.
from 00/01 season - 03/04 season Tmac was a monster. this was pre injuries. You dont average darn near 27ppg one year, 25.6 the next year, 32 points the next year, and then 28 points the next. with 1 block and 1.5 stls per, 5 assists per, and not end up in the hall of fame.
his first 3 seasons with the rockets after that back just was tearing him up and the knee issues. he was still sitting at 24 and change per game.
the 13 points in 13 seconds is the reason why he made it, find me a player that does that in that amount of time you'll see him the hall of fame as well
reggie did something similar and we know where he resides... in that hall. where he belongs.
Joined: 03 Oct 2003 Posts: 8330 Location: Santa Monica
Posted: Thu Sep 21, 2017 6:34 pm Post subject:
If someone like Bernard King who had one or two great years got into the HOF, then TMac will get in. The real problem is that the basketball HOF is not selective enough. I hate to say this, but it almost cheapens the whole honor of making it there, unlike the football and baseball HOFs which seem more selective. _________________ Lakers 49ers Chargers Dodgers
Joined: 02 Jun 2009 Posts: 2415 Location: Far from home
Posted: Fri Sep 22, 2017 9:05 am Post subject:
Bernard King was better than you assert.
He had two separate career stretches of great play over multiple years, both one pre-injury and the second post-injury. Was runner-up in MVP votes in '84, higher than Magic Johnson. He belongs absolutely, IMO and he is in. _________________ “These GOAT discussions are fun distractions while sitting around waiting for the pizza to be served.”
Joined: 03 Oct 2003 Posts: 8330 Location: Santa Monica
Posted: Sat Sep 23, 2017 12:13 am Post subject:
Wilkes52 wrote:
Bernard King was better than you assert.
He had two separate career stretches of great play over multiple years, both one pre-injury and the second post-injury. Was runner-up in MVP votes in '84, higher than Magic Johnson. He belongs absolutely, IMO and he is in.
I know that Bernard King had a bit of a comeback in the early 90s (he was before my time), and I've heard about those series he had vs Detroit and Boston in 84. My point is it's a similar situation because both players were playing at that kind of level for a few years, but their careers were severely cut short by injury. I just wish the basketball HOF were a little more selective like the other major sports HOFs. _________________ Lakers 49ers Chargers Dodgers
Last edited by slavavov on Sat Sep 23, 2017 4:54 pm; edited 1 time in total
If someone like Bernard King who had one or two great years got into the HOF, then TMac will get in. The real problem is that the basketball HOF is not selective enough. I hate to say this, but it almost cheapens the whole honor of making it there, unlike the football and baseball HOFs which seem more selective.
I don't know much about the football hall of fame, but the same criticism has been made about the baseball hall of fame. They've made tons of bad choices over the years.
Basketball Reference has a good formula where they compare a HOF candidates qualifications against the qualifications of people who made the Hall.
McGrady has a 95.5% rating. For context, everyone player from the 60s on with a score of 80% or higher is in the Hall. So he was pretty much a cinch to make it.
I get that McGrady doesn't seem like a Hall of Famer. But that's true of half the guys in the Hall.
As someone else noted, the perception of who is in the Hall is much different than who actually is in it. There are a lot more Jamal Wilkes, Adrian Dantleys and Dave Bings in the Hall than MJs, Magics and Wilts in the Hall.
Good points. Having being able to watch all the careers of all the players you've listed above, I would have only MJ, Magic, and Wilt in the Hall, just like I would only have Kareem, Wilt, West, Magic, Shaq & Kobe in our rafters. Its not a slight at Worthy, Goodrich, or Wilkes.
The Dantleys, Wilkes, Bings, and MacGrady, etc., are all-time greats to me, but not HOF. Well at least the HOF I have in mind.
Basketball Reference has a good formula where they compare a HOF candidates qualifications against the qualifications of people who made the Hall.
McGrady has a 95.5% rating. For context, everyone player from the 60s on with a score of 80% or higher is in the Hall. So he was pretty much a cinch to make it.
I get that McGrady doesn't seem like a Hall of Famer. But that's true of half the guys in the Hall.
As someone else noted, the perception of who is in the Hall is much different than who actually is in it. There are a lot more Jamal Wilkes, Adrian Dantleys and Dave Bings in the Hall than MJs, Magics and Wilts in the Hall.
Good points. Having being able to watch all the careers of all the players you've listed above, I would have only MJ, Magic, and Wilt in the Hall, just like I would only have Kareem, Wilt, West, Magic, Shaq & Kobe in our rafters. Its not a slight at Worthy, Goodrich, or Wilkes.
The Dantleys, Wilkes, Bings, and MacGrady, etc., are all-time greats to me, but not HOF. Well at least the HOF I have in mind.
If someone like Bernard King who had one or two great years got into the HOF, then TMac will get in. The real problem is that the basketball HOF is not selective enough. I hate to say this, but it almost cheapens the whole honor of making it there, unlike the football and baseball HOFs which seem more selective.
I don't know much about the football hall of fame, but the same criticism has been made about the baseball hall of fame. They've made tons of bad choices over the years.
Cooperstown is a lot more selective today than it was in the past. Jim Rice was a borderline selection, and Fred McGriff didn't make it. Players with analogous resumes would be no brainers for Springfield.
But Cooperstown was not always so selective. Bill James' book about Cooperstown goes through the history. There are all sorts of guys from the '20s and '30s who have no business being in Cooperstown, but the old timers committee loaded up the Hall.
Basketball Reference has a good formula where they compare a HOF candidates qualifications against the qualifications of people who made the Hall.
McGrady has a 95.5% rating. For context, everyone player from the 60s on with a score of 80% or higher is in the Hall. So he was pretty much a cinch to make it.
I get that McGrady doesn't seem like a Hall of Famer. But that's true of half the guys in the Hall.
As someone else noted, the perception of who is in the Hall is much different than who actually is in it. There are a lot more Jamal Wilkes, Adrian Dantleys and Dave Bings in the Hall than MJs, Magics and Wilts in the Hall.
Good points. Having being able to watch all the careers of all the players you've listed above, I would have only MJ, Magic, and Wilt in the Hall, just like I would only have Kareem, Wilt, West, Magic, Shaq & Kobe in our rafters. Its not a slight at Worthy, Goodrich, or Wilkes.
The Dantleys, Wilkes, Bings, and MacGrady, etc., are all-time greats to me, but not HOF. Well at least the HOF I have in mind.
I agree with you. I wouldn't have put any of those four in the Hall myself
If someone like Bernard King who had one or two great years got into the HOF, then TMac will get in. The real problem is that the basketball HOF is not selective enough. I hate to say this, but it almost cheapens the whole honor of making it there, unlike the football and baseball HOFs which seem more selective.
I don't know much about the football hall of fame, but the same criticism has been made about the baseball hall of fame. They've made tons of bad choices over the years.
Cooperstown is a lot more selective today than it was in the past. Jim Rice was a borderline selection, and Fred McGriff didn't make it. Players with analogous resumes would be no brainers for Springfield.
But Cooperstown was not always so selective. Bill James' book about Cooperstown goes through the history. There are all sorts of guys from the '20s and '30s who have no business being in Cooperstown, but the old timers committee loaded up the Hall.
I've read James book. It's good. The basketball hall seems to be going through a period where they are inducting every borderline player who has been eligible for the past 30 years.
The new borderline is Jack Sikma, Tim Hardaway, and Shawn Marion, which I think is kind of sad.
Basketball Reference has a good formula where they compare a HOF candidates qualifications against the qualifications of people who made the Hall.
McGrady has a 95.5% rating. For context, everyone player from the 60s on with a score of 80% or higher is in the Hall. So he was pretty much a cinch to make it.
I get that McGrady doesn't seem like a Hall of Famer. But that's true of half the guys in the Hall.
As someone else noted, the perception of who is in the Hall is much different than who actually is in it. There are a lot more Jamal Wilkes, Adrian Dantleys and Dave Bings in the Hall than MJs, Magics and Wilts in the Hall.
Good points. Having being able to watch all the careers of all the players you've listed above, I would have only MJ, Magic, and Wilt in the Hall, just like I would only have Kareem, Wilt, West, Magic, Shaq & Kobe in our rafters. Its not a slight at Worthy, Goodrich, or Wilkes.
The Dantleys, Wilkes, Bings, and MacGrady, etc., are all-time greats to me, but not HOF. Well at least the HOF I have in mind.
I agree with you. I wouldn't have put any of those four in the Hall myself
After giving it a bit more thought I would actually leave Worthy, Wilkes, Goodrich's names on the rafters. The reason for the change is the distinction I'm making between HOF'ers, which they're not, and all time Laker greats, which they were.
The new borderline is Jack Sikma, Tim Hardaway, and Shawn Marion, which I think is kind of sad.
Yep. Jo Jo White made me cringe.
I can understand why Adrian Dantley made it. As I often say in these discussions, memories fade, but stats last forever. Dantley had stats, and people will forget all of the baggage that went with him. Likewise, I can understand why TMac made it. He put up some big numbers and, at one time, was considered in the same class as Kobe.
But Jo Jo White? I'm old enough to remember him. He was a good player. But his stats don't qualify him -- his career PER is under 15. He played for the Celtics and won a title or two, but he wasn't part of the dynasty. He went 34 years without being selected. Where did that selection come from?
Joined: 16 Jun 2005 Posts: 40345 Location: Dirty South
Posted: Mon Oct 02, 2017 5:30 am Post subject:
just had to comment on this one.....this is a joke right? TMac was an elite player for nearly a decade, and arguably the best player in the league for a couple years. He was a lock.....this is not Cooperstown.
The new borderline is Jack Sikma, Tim Hardaway, and Shawn Marion, which I think is kind of sad.
Yep. Jo Jo White made me cringe.
I can understand why Adrian Dantley made it. As I often say in these discussions, memories fade, but stats last forever. Dantley had stats, and people will forget all of the baggage that went with him. Likewise, I can understand why TMac made it. He put up some big numbers and, at one time, was considered in the same class as Kobe.
But Jo Jo White? I'm old enough to remember him. He was a good player. But his stats don't qualify him -- his career PER is under 15. He played for the Celtics and won a title or two, but he wasn't part of the dynasty. He went 34 years without being selected. Where did that selection come from?
Seems like a bunch of old guys who were eligible for decades are getting inducted en masse. I wonder if they changed some of the committees
All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page Previous1, 2
Page 2 of 2
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum