Reply With Quote
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.
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.
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.
Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!
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.
Last edited by Obstructed_View; 08-20-2010 at 01:51 PM.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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?
Really? That's suprising. Tony's been great I agree but if Pop could keep Strickland's at ude 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.
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.
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.
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.
I agree
I still remember that re ed no-look pass Rod threw to nobody in crunch time of that game 7 vs Portland
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
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.
An irony of the "assist" statistic is that a player can actually perform selfishly even while ac ulating assists, particularly if he makes it his mission to ac ulate 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?
You're like a sock puppet.
Please post this in the appropriate thead about SFs. This is the Rod Strickland HOF thread.
Thanks!
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
