Rod Strickland HOF???

[cantthinkofanything]

I liked Strickland since his DePaul days but the f'ups in the playoffs and later what seemed like a growing selfishness kind of put me off.

Seriously, I didn't realize this.

Rod Strickland sits at #9 on the all time assist list.
Everyone above him is or looks to be HOF.
Although I guess Mark Jackson isn't a shoo in from what I've read.

Strickland sits at just under 8,000 assists and 15,000 ponits for his career.
Is there anyone else with similar stats that isn't in the HOF?
I couldn't find a quick answer to this so I don't know.

Anyone buying this? He did play a looonng time but those are pretty good numbers.

[cantthinkofanything]

Ok, then someone just tell me one player with more assists and points who isn't or won't be in the Hall of Fame.

[lebomb]

Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!

[Obstructed_View]

Everyone above him, and several guys below him are going to the hall. He is not. According to BBall Reference, Vin Baker and Jeff Malone are about 20 times more likely to be enshrined than Rodney is.


EDIT: You mentioned Mark Jackson, and I whiffed on him. He likely won't ever make the hall of fame for the same reason Strickland won't, and he has better numbers over the same number of years in his career.

[cantthinkofanything]

Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!

WTF??? I'm serious about the question.

I know that he has no realistic shot but his stats seem to stand up. He's also top 20 in all time steals.

I'm not a stat guy so I don't know the best place to find a combined list of >10,000 pts and >5,000 assists without going through player by player and looking at their totals. I just want to see if there are any players with better or comparable stats that isn't HOF.

[lebomb]

WTF??? I'm serious about the question.

I know that he has no realistic shot but his stats seem to stand up. He's also top 20 in all time steals.

I'm not a stat guy so I don't know the best place to find a combined list of >10,000 pts and >5,000 assists without going through player by player and looking at their totals. I just want to see if there are any players with better or comparable stats that isn't HOF.


HOFs make their teams better, Rod Strickland demolished his teams.

[cantthinkofanything]

Everyone above him, and several guys below him are going to the hall. He is not. According to BBall Reference, Vin Baker and Jeff Malone are about 20 times more likely to be enshrined than Rodney is.

Just checked out the site but didn't spend any time understanding the math. But at face value, Vin Baker and Jeff Malone don't strike me as more qualified.

[cantthinkofanything]

HOFs make their teams better, Rod Strickland demolished his teams.

What if he had the exact same stats but wasn't the head case that he was. If he was a model citizen and great all around guy, does he make it?

[Solid D]

HOFs make their teams better, Rod Strickland demolished his teams.

Therein lies the problem. Rod had a love/hate relationship with most all of the 9 teams he played for over his 17 year career. He could score and he could deal the ball...and with flair. He entertained. He did not make teams better and the higher his numbers went, the worse the teams he played for seemed to fare in the Win column. He scored more than 14,000 points and dished out 8,000 assists. He held out for more money, he pouted about never making an All-Star team, he "dropped" his towel in the hall of the hotel (not going there), he was moody....an HOF'er? Notsomuch.

[lefty]

Rod Strickland was so talented ...........

But talent alone doesn`t get you into the HOF

[cantthinkofanything]

Rod Strickland was so talented ...........

But talent alone doesn`t get you into the HOF

No doubt. I think if you take Strickland in his prime and put him in Parker's place, the Spurs win an extra ring or two. With Pop as coach, I don't think he ever "grows" into the ahole that he ended up being.

[Solid D]

No doubt. I think if you take Strickland in his prime and put him in Parker's place, the Spurs win an extra ring or two. With Pop as coach, I don't think he ever "grows" into the ahole that he ended up being.

I totally disagree. Tony does make the Spurs better when he is in there, in most cases. With Rod in there instead of Tony, I'm not sure the Spurs would have more than 1 or 2 rings.

[TheSullyMonster]

Career from 1988-2005.

2nd team All Rookie
2nd all nba once.

Not a single all star game.

And we're seriously asking if he's a HoF player?

[cantthinkofanything]

I totally disagree. Tony does make the Spurs better when he is in there, in most cases. With Rod in there instead of Tony, I'm not sure the Spurs would have more than 1 or 2 rings.

Really? That's suprising. Tony's been great I agree but if Pop could keep Strickland's attitude in check, I think they come out better. Strickland, while not as quick as Parker, seemed to always get to the rim. With Duncan and the shooters we've had to kick the ball to, he would have been hard to deal with when he got into the lane. I think the D and shooting are a wash.

[cantthinkofanything]

Career from 1988-2005.

2nd team All Rookie
2nd all nba once.

Not a single all star game.

And we're seriously asking if he's a HoF player?

I'm not suggesting that he is going to get into the HOF but my point was that he had great career numbers that get most players in.

Without having to check year by year, there were some pretty good PG in the league when Rod was in his prime.
And there is no doubt that he deserved one or two All Star nods.

[fantasyfootball]

He's got good numbers, but he was never an all-star. How can you never be an all-star but be a HOFer?

He was a good player but nowhere near HOF caliber.

[ambchang]

Saying the Spurs would win more rings with Strickland in place of Parker makes me wonder if you have ever watched Strickland played. He put up decent stats on losing teams, and destroy teams in the process.

He makes dumb mistakes at crucial moments, and doesn't impact games positively.

He puts up most of his assist numbers at Portland and Washington (one mediocre and one horrible team), where he dominated the ball.

Tony Parker on the other hand, get things done when needed, breaking down the defense accordingly, put up good assists numbers in a system that utilized everyone on the court to set up plays, and was a better and more efficient scorer and director Strickland ever was.

On one hand, I do not want Parker to ever leave SA, but I would understand because the way he has been treated by many of the fans has been down right puzzling. Parker can just never get the credit he deserves.

[lefty]

I totally disagree. Tony does make the Spurs better when he is in there, in most cases. With Rod in there instead of Tony, I'm not sure the Spurs would have more than 1 or 2 rings.
I agree


I still remember that retarded no-look pass Rod threw to nobody in crunch time of that game 7 vs Portland :bang

[The Truth #6]

Pop could handle one headcase, but only one. So, I do think Rod could have survived under Pop. He was a great finisher and pretty good distributor. And, he was very consistent for a very long time.

As for as All Star appearances - that's the most overrated critera there is when assessing a player. How many All Star teams has Manu made? We all know he's better than that.

[ducks]

Pop could handle one headcase, but only one. So, I do think Rod could have survived under Pop. He was a great finisher and pretty good distributor. And, he was very consistent for a very long time.

As for as All Star appearances - that's the most overrated critera there is when assessing a player. How many All Star teams has Manu made? We all know he's better than that.

yeah sure he is
only when healthy he might be

[cantthinkofanything]

As for as All Star appearances - that's the most overrated critera there is when assessing a player. How many All Star teams has Manu made? We all know he's better than that.

Exactly.
In his prime, Strickland was in the west with Magic for a couple of years, Stockton, Hardaway, and Payton for most of the rest. Then in the East toward the end of his prime, both Hardaways.

[FromWayDowntown]

An irony of the "assist" statistic is that a player can actually perform selfishly even while accumulating assists, particularly if he makes it his mission to accumulate assists rather than taking them as they come.

Further, as statistical categories go, assists tend to be among the most subjectively-determined.

And with respect to the all-time list, I think there's a pretty reasonable argument that if there's going to be a line of demarcation on that list #8 is a pretty good place to draw that line, by and large. Notwithstanding the fact that Mark Jackson has no business being in the Hall of Fame, the guys from 9 -- where Strickland currently sits -- and 24 on the assist list aren't (by and large) Hall of Famers. Of those guys, 3 are in the HOF on the merit of things beyond their assist numbers (Lenny Wilkens, Bob Cousy, Nate Archibald). The other 13 in that range are guys who were talented pros, even occasional All-Stars, but not exactly the elite players in the history of the game -- Mo Cheeks, Terry Porter, Tim Hardaway, Guy Rodgers, Muggsy Bogues, Kevin Johnson, Derek Harper, Stephon Marbury, Andre Miller, John Lucas, Reggie Theus, Norm Nixon.

It seems quite reasonable to me to conclude that Rod Strickland is more like the latter group than he is like John Stockton, Magic Johnson, Jason Kidd, Oscar Robertson, Isiah Thomas, Gary Payton, or Steve Nash -- guys who were perennially all-league players and/or won MVPs.

[cantthinkofanything]

An irony of the "assist" statistic is that a player can actually perform selfishly even while accumulating assists, particularly if he makes it his mission to accumulate assists rather than taking them as they come.

Further, as statistical categories go, assists tend to be among the most subjectively-determined.

And with respect to the all-time list, I think there's a pretty reasonable argument that if there's going to be a line of demarcation on that list #8 is a pretty good place to draw that line, by and large. Notwithstanding the fact that Mark Jackson has no business being in the Hall of Fame, the guys from 9 -- where Strickland currently sits -- and 24 on the assist list aren't (by and large) Hall of Famers. Of those guys, 3 are in the HOF on the merit of things beyond their assist numbers (Lenny Wilkens, Bob Cousy, Nate Archibald). The other 13 in that range are guys who were talented pros, even occasional All-Stars, but not exactly the elite players in the history of the game -- Mo Cheeks, Terry Porter, Tim Hardaway, Guy Rodgers, Muggsy Bogues, Kevin Johnson, Derek Harper, Stephon Marbury, Andre Miller, John Lucas, Reggie Theus, Norm Nixon.

It seems quite reasonable to me to conclude that Rod Strickland is more like the latter group than he is like John Stockton, Magic Johnson, Jason Kidd, Oscar Robertson, Isiah Thomas, Gary Payton, or Steve Nash -- guys who were perennially all-league players and/or won MVPs.

Yeah, I agree with this point. Everyone above (except Jackson) is clear cut HOF. Everyone below, based on play, not so much.

Rod Strickland - DePaul Hall of Fame?

[The Truth #6]

yeah sure he is
only when healthy he might be

You're like a sock puppet.

[cantthinkofanything]

You're like a sock puppet.

Please post this in the appropriate thead about SFs. This is the Rod Strickland HOF thread.

Thanks!

[Leonard Curse]

Saying the Spurs would win more rings with Strickland in place of Parker makes me wonder if you have ever watched Strickland played. He put up decent stats on losing teams, and destroy teams in the process.

He makes dumb mistakes at crucial moments, and doesn't impact games positively.

He puts up most of his assist numbers at Portland and Washington (one mediocre and one horrible team), where he dominated the ball.

Tony Parker on the other hand, get things done when needed, breaking down the defense accordingly, put up good assists numbers in a system that utilized everyone on the court to set up plays, and was a better and more efficient scorer and director Strickland ever was.

On one hand, I do not want Parker to ever leave SA, but I would understand because the way he has been treated by many of the fans has been down right puzzling. Parker can just never get the credit he deserves.


:lol you would not be saying this if you came across parker, you act as if parker is like this tim duncan or ginobili kind of guy. his attitude is more like kobe than youll ever know. theres a reason why people say what they say about parker have you ever heard spurs fans (not spurstalk fans) but regular fans diss a leader of the spurs so hard? no. never because san antonio isnt like that

[fantasyfootball]

Pop could handle one headcase, but only one. So, I do think Rod could have survived under Pop. He was a great finisher and pretty good distributor. And, he was very consistent for a very long time.

As for as All Star appearances - that's the most overrated critera there is when assessing a player. How many All Star teams has Manu made? We all know he's better than that.

Manu's awesome but he's not a HOFer either, at least not for his NBA accomplishments.

All-star games are hardly the epitome of objectivity, but if you couldn't beat out the players that were starters and reserves a few times in your career, then you aren't suddendly good enough to be amongst legends. On this note, just because you're in a few ASGs doesn't make you automatically worthy but it should be a prerequisite.

Rod Strickland is in that group of good but not great, sometimes semi-star/star but not superstar type of players. Examples I can think of: Detlef Schrempf, Sean Elliott, Jerome Kersey, Dikembe Mutombo, Trevor Ariza, Derek Harper, Dan Majerle, Vlade Divac, Jeff Hornacek, Hersey Hawkins, Mike Bibby, Kirk Hinrich, Armen Gilliam, etc.

[will_spurs]

I think the D and shooting are a wash.

Strickland best shooting season: .485
Parker career average: .490

Sure looks like a wash :rolleyes

(bonus stat: last year when Parker supposedly sucked, he still shot .487, better than Strickland's best season ever - not my fault if Parker shoots like a 7-footer)

[ChuckD]

Just checked out the site but didn't spend any time understanding the math. But at face value, Vin Baker and Jeff Malone don't strike me as more qualified.

Don't understand their formulas either, but they work. I don't really need to know why. About 95% of the players above their predictor line are in, and about 95% of the players below are not, and a LOT of the "below" group are old timers from the 40s, 50s, and 60s.

[ChuckD]

Exactly.
In his prime, Strickland was in the west with Magic for a couple of years, Stockton, Hardaway, and Payton for most of the rest. Then in the East toward the end of his prime, both Hardaways.

HOF players stand out amongst their peers.

[ChuckD]

Manu's awesome but he's not a HOFer either, at least not for his NBA accomplishments.

Manu would make it without having ever played one NBA minute. His Euroleague and FIBA accomplishments make him a lock. His NBA clutchness and heroics are just a cherry on top of his very own basketball HOF sundae.

[The Truth #6]

Manu's awesome but he's not a HOFer either, at least not for his NBA accomplishments.

All-star games are hardly the epitome of objectivity, but if you couldn't beat out the players that were starters and reserves a few times in your career, then you aren't suddendly good enough to be amongst legends. On this note, just because you're in a few ASGs doesn't make you automatically worthy but it should be a prerequisite.

Rod Strickland is in that group of good but not great, sometimes semi-star/star but not superstar type of players. Examples I can think of: Detlef Schrempf, Sean Elliott, Jerome Kersey, Dikembe Mutombo, Trevor Ariza, Derek Harper, Dan Majerle, Vlade Divac, Jeff Hornacek, Hersey Hawkins, Mike Bibby, Kirk Hinrich, Armen Gilliam, etc.

Not sure why you turned this around into a Manu HOF argument.

[bigfan]

I think there was a time I would have said the guy had just the smoothest talent, he really seemed great for a short time as a Spur. Then he got to be a smart ass or got traded or whatever and that was that.

[SenorSpur]

Therein lies the problem. Rod had a love/hate relationship with most all of the 9 teams he played for over his 17 year career. He could score and he could deal the ball...and with flair. He entertained. He did not make teams better and the higher his numbers went, the worse the teams he played for seemed to fare in the Win column. He scored more than 14,000 points and dished out 8,000 assists. He held out for more money, he pouted about never making an All-Star team, he "dropped" his towel in the hall of the hotel (not going there), he was moody....an HOF'er? Notsomuch.

No please go there. :lol Somehow I don't recall THAT story.

[TDMVPDPOY]

if the worm cant get in, how u suppose the rod gets in?

[cantthinkofanything]

Strickland best shooting season: .485
Parker career average: .490

Sure looks like a wash :rolleyes

(bonus stat: last year when Parker supposedly sucked, he still shot .487, better than Strickland's best season ever - not my fault if Parker shoots like a 7-footer)

With his physical advantages, if Parker had 1/2 of Stricklands bball iq, he would be an all time top 5 pg.

WTF with cliff lee today

[barbacoataco]

Allstar selections is far from a perfect guage for HOF's, but if he didn't even make it once I think that is a pretty good indication that Strickland was not considered an elite player. You don't even have to be the best PG in the conference to make it, since they usually pick 2-3 PG's from each conference on the team. It is true that Ginobili only has one Allstar appearance, but there were a couple of years when it was controversial that he wasn't picked. Ginobili is a much more respected player in the league than Strickland ever was.

[Obstructed_View]

Strickland led the league in assists one year and didn't get an all-star nod. I found an article basically suggesting he's the best player never to make an all star team. He did get a single MVP vote in 1998 though. Must have been Tony Kornheiser.

[Sean Cagney]

He's got good numbers, but he was never an all-star. How can you never be an all-star but be a HOFer?

He was a good player but nowhere near HOF caliber.

One or two years in Washington he should have been in the All Star game no doubt! Penny got in there without playing at all and Rod was having a sensational year. I remember that well.

[Obstructed_View]

One or two years in Washington he should have been in the All Star game no doubt! Penny got in there without playing at all and Rod was having a sensational year. I remember that well.

Yep Penny played in less than 20 games that year. Gotta love fan voting.

[Spursfan092120]

HOFs make their teams better, Rod Strickland demolished his teams.
Two words...Terrell Owens...he'll be in the HOF.

[Obstructed_View]

Two words...Terrell Owens...he'll be in the HOF.

Two more words: Pete Maravich. He's already in the HOF.

[jonnybravo]

He's got good numbers, but he was never an all-star. How can you never be an all-star but be a HOFer?

He was a good player but nowhere near HOF caliber.

The quintessential New York Pg. Trash. The whole lot of them. Kenny Andersen, Stephon etc, etc. I'll give a pass to Mark Jackson.

[cherylsteele]

If Strickland gets in then Artis Gilmore should be in ahead of him.

[ambchang]

:lol you would not be saying this if you came across parker, you act as if parker is like this tim duncan or ginobili kind of guy. his attitude is more like kobe than youll ever know. theres a reason why people say what they say about parker have you ever heard spurs fans (not spurstalk fans) but regular fans diss a leader of the spurs so hard? no. never because san antonio isnt like that
What does his attitude off the court have anything to do with the value he has given the Spurs compared to Rod Strickland?
I am not really interested or concerned about how snobbish he is to his fans, or some random person he met. Fact is, Parker has steadily improved with the Spurs since joining the team 8 years ago, and has taken incredible improvements in his game, doing what the team required him to do in order to win.

The same cannot be said of Strickland.

[ambchang]

With his physical advantages, if Parker had 1/2 of Stricklands bball iq, he would be an all time top 5 pg.

WTF with cliff lee today

Did you really just talked up Strickland's bball IQ?