Reply With Quote
I would say LeBron and Wade
lame
I would say LeBron and Wade
The people who put together that formula simply studied what criteria have historically been most predictive of selection... nothing more. They're not saying those criteria are valid. It's just a prediction model.
Exactly.
Manu may not fit this formula very well because of where his NBA career fits in with his age. I agree that he may well end up in because of international play. I think he'd have to continue to play at a high level in the NBA though for it to happen.
I don't how these % work but I guess they consider TP having more chances because he is younger but IMO Manu will be HOF and for me he has more chances than TP in particular with his international successes.
He's a fantastic player but unfortunately people that don't get him would look at his numbers and think "role player." He isn't. I'd put him in above half the guys ahead of him on that list.
Manu should make it because of his international accomplishments. It's not the NBA Hall of Fame, it's the Basketball Hall of Fame. I'd argue that in worldwide basketball, Manu has had a larger impact than most other NBA players.
Exactly, Manu is another first ballot but due to his international accomplishments. If it wasn't for that, he'd have no chance whatsoever of making the HoF if he was to retire now.
Same as Petrovic, who won 3 Olympic medals, 11 more World Cup/Eurobasket/etc medals, a dozen of club les in FIBA basketball + lots of individual awards. Yao is a different case, he can make it due to his NBA career (I think he will, just not now) or he can always be elected as a contributor.
Sure I'm not saying it is not valid from a statistical point of view, i just don't think it fits on an actual basketball discussion about whether a player should or not go to the HOF.
If it has predictive power, why not?
I want Vince to get in, but I know he won't.
Hume's observation about ises and oughts comes to mind.
Huh, why? How is this a is-ought problem?
At first glance I was surprised Ray Allen was 11th on the list... then I looked lower, and he's right where he should be, with one exception...
Steve Nash. His lack of playoff success will hurt him, but I don't think there's any chance he's not going to the Hall of Fame.
This is why I think the 7 stats are not a good predictive model, due to his international career he is more a lock than TP, Carter or Ray Allen.
I agree I don't see a former MVP out of the HOF
former back to back mvp...
although, I still don't get how that is the case. Great player, but not 2-time mvp level.
HOw many does Kobe have?
u're right I almost forget just to say these mvps are a little * but anyway Nash is a lock for the HOF because of that.
It's called an outlier. It's not enough to make it a not good predictive model.
I think it's a pretty good predictive model - the best proof is that nobody has been able to build a more powerful one.
chris Paul ...no not enough seasons .... but if he maintains at least 80% of his numbers for 5 more seasons he is in.
Marion No
Jamison No
Boozer No
Brand No
Everyone else I say they get in but VC is on the line of demarcation for me ...
LeBron and Wade have just finished their 7th season in the league. LeBron's two league MVPs makes it impossible for him not to already be a lock for the HOF. And while I know Wade has been unbelievable and has a le and Finals MVP, if he were to retire today, as was the original question, I don't think he's a lock.
Vince Carter is a great example of why you can't just look at the first 7 seasons and know for sure that the player will live up to that standard the rest of his career. After 7 seasons, he might have even been more of a likely HOF candidate. But sometimes a player's career can turn. Or look at Grant Hill. Based on his NBA career (he might still get in for his college career), he has a very small probability of getting in the Hall. But if you evaluated his career after his first 6 seasons with Detroit and you went on to predict what he'd do the rest of his career, most people would have said he's well on his way to the HOF. But we all know his career got derailed by injury and now he's probably not getting in, based on his NBA resume.
That's why I don't think Wade is a lock right now. Obviously the le and Finals MVP give him a better shot than guys like VC after his first 7 seasons or Grant Hill after his 6 seasons, but to me, not a lock. Guys like Jo Jo White and Cedric Maxwell have Finals MVPs but are not and will not be HOFers.
agree.
But even if Wade finishes his career like VC's I think he makes it.
At his best he was better than the guys you mentioned but I never saw jojo play and Cedric was almost washed up when i started watching him ...
Grant Hill is a first ballot HOFer only because its the Basketball Hall of Fame not the Pro Basketball Hall of Fame. You guys are forgetting they include College credentials.
I know this sounds crazy because he actually retired and Grant Hill didn't, but I think the "Gale Sayers" factor will help Grant Hill. A lot of people will think what his stats would have been had he stayed healthy.
Note: this only works for people who have a few productive years first (Im looking at you Oden)
Maurice Stokes should be a bench mark for those types of players. He only had 3 NBA years total (1956-58), but was awesome in those years plus had a great college career. David Thompson only had 6 great NBA years then averaged in the low to mid teens for his last 3 years but was a legend because of his those first 6, plus his utter awesomeness in college. Maybe Hill won't be a first ballot guy but he'll get in. His college career helps him a ton. He also has a Gold Medal from the 96 games which counts in his favor as well.
Maurice Stokes is an interesting case and I don't really know his story so not sure why he's in. But as for David Thompson, if you look at him and he's in the Hall, wouldn't that make for an argument that Tracy McGrady belongs in the HOF? He doesn't have the college resume obviously, but he does have a gold medal. And in his peak years, he put up a number of crazy statistical seasons. I don't think too many would consider T-Mac as a realistic HOFer.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
