Advanced Member
Posted 16 August 2014 - 07:24 PM
With some of the players (I haven't looked at coaches etc) getting in to the HOF it makes it seem (to me anyway) that they need to make it harder to get in. Am I being too harsh in saying someone like Mitch Richmond shouldn't get in? I know it's EXTREMELY hard to narrow down criteria which would allow you to get in but I think they should make public who is on the committee and why they inducted (or denied) someone.
Opinions?
Edited by GarnettFan4Life, 17 August 2014 - 03:41 AM.
Cheers,
Matt
Moderator
Posted 16 August 2014 - 11:55 PM
Hmmmmmm...... I was recently reading an ESPN article about on the cusp players which included their overall WARP rating and their expected % chance of being inducted; some interestin stuff.
As for your question - I kinda agree wih both poll options (Is that why you can select both or was that a mistake lol) - whilst I agree it seems a bit odd that Mitch got in, we don't know exactly why and yeah, you can't really define why someone gets in by a set criteria IMO.
Advanced Member
Posted 17 August 2014 - 03:42 AM
Yeah there was debate about fringe players, interesting stuff for sure.
Vince Carter should be in for sure. TMac I'd lean towards no. Derek Fisher no. Gotta reign in the standards may as well start now!
Cheers,
Matt
Moderator
Posted 17 August 2014 - 11:45 PM
Hard to say. My personal opinion is that some players get in that I don't think should be there but I don't know what the criteria are.
Do you know how they categories people into the hall of fame? Like what is the system?
Advanced Member
Posted 18 August 2014 - 07:03 AM
I would say Penny no, Webber maybe and Hill most likely of the 3 because of NCAA success combined with NBA longevity.
Of a tightened criteria HOF none of them would go in IMO
Edited by GarnettFan4Life, 18 August 2014 - 07:04 AM.
Cheers,
Matt
Advanced Member
Posted 18 August 2014 - 07:06 AM
Great blog about Hall of Fame standards and trying to figure out a point allocation for career stats.
http://statitudes.co...fame-standards/
Couple of points I would add would be some kind of proportionate ratio for All Defensive Teams, Rookie of The Year and maybe Olympic Gold Medals.
Cheers,
Matt
Advanced Member
Posted 18 August 2014 - 07:11 AM
He was a pretty iconic player during his hey day....... though perhaps it wasn't for a long enough period!? Not sure what the criteria is though...
Exactly the point I'm trying to make! The panel members should have to make known what they used to put someone in or denied them that year.
Iverson - yes
Paul Pierce - yes
Shaq - yes
Manu Ginobili?
Shawn Kemp?
there's some tough decisions to be made.
Looking back at guys already in there is tough too because they were put in based on some achievements and the overall basketball standard up to that point in time. Gail Goodrich for example. Borderline IMO. Clyde Lovelette. Shouldn't be in IMO. Good topic for discussion for sure!
Cheers,
Matt
Moderator
Posted 18 August 2014 - 10:03 AM
Exactly the point I'm trying to make! The panel members should have to make known what they used to put someone in or denied them that year.
Iverson - yes
Paul Pierce - yes
Shaq - yes
Manu Ginobili?
Shawn Kemp?
there's some tough decisions to be made.
Looking back at guys already in there is tough too because they were put in based on some achievements and the overall basketball standard up to that point in time. Gail Goodrich for example. Borderline IMO. Clyde Lovelette. Shouldn't be in IMO. Good topic for discussion for sure!
Shawn Kemp for sure........ although, do they take into account their character is another question haha...... Kemp's antics later in his career aren't so great.
Advanced Member
Posted 19 August 2014 - 10:43 AM
I would say Penny no, Webber maybe and Hill most likely of the 3 because of NCAA success combined with NBA longevity.
Of a tightened criteria HOF none of them would go in IMO
I agree wholeheartedly with this.
Moderator
Posted 24 August 2014 - 08:03 PM
Great blog about Hall of Fame standards and trying to figure out a point allocation for career stats.
http://statitudes.co...fame-standards/
Couple of points I would add would be some kind of proportionate ratio for All Defensive Teams, Rookie of The Year and maybe Olympic Gold Medals.
Thanks for the link. Was a good read.
The criteria definitely favours the shooters who score most points which eventually lead to winning MVPs on most occasions.
To the ones you added, I would perhaps add a category for % shooting as some clutch players of the bench were very deadly, but barely made it over 10 points but they have wicked accuracy. There is also nothing about blocks and steals so perhaps could add something here, but I guess did they ever record those stats back in the 50s-70s?
Moderator
Posted 27 August 2014 - 02:22 AM
I would have to say Kemp no I think. Can't let nostalgia get in the way of the decision. He was awesome, teamed up amazing with Payton but Payton was on another level.
Boooooooooooo! 
