Would you support an NBA-Specific Hall of Fame?

[Blame Rasho]

Vince Carter not making a single All-NBA 1st reminds me just how stacked the early 00s was in wing play.

Well when you consider he was never a mvp level player… it isn’t surprising. Some people are just about highlights.

[NZB2323]

Would this include all-ABA 1st teams also?

No all-NBA 1st team would mean no Reggie Miller, Ray Allen, Paul Pierce, or Pau Gasol. I think most fans would be against that.

The easy way to start it is to induct the top 76 players and then each year you add 1 player. That way, the number of players is equal to how long the NBA has been around.

And you could add 3 players from when the top 76 list came out, so you could add Jokic, Luka, and Tatum, or if you didn’t want to include active players you could add Dwight, Pau, and Tmac.

[dhsilv2]

So Tiny gets in because he played in the weak 70's but no Reggie Miller, Hal Greer, Melo (I'm good with that one), Butler, KJ, Blake, Ming, Deke, Gobert, Ben Wallace, Tony Parker, Paul Pierce, Billups, Cowens (who managed an MVP but not first team), Joe Dumars, Alex English, Sam Jones, Ray Allen, Vince Carter and many others.

Yeah I'm fine with an NBA hall but the first team all nba is massive bias to prior eras and leaves out top 10 type guys because of bs positional crap. So completely against that criteria.

That's good feedback. Though honestly, from your list, the only guys I look at and think they deserve to be in the Hall are Wallace, Butler and Cowens. That's crazy about Cowens winning an MVP and not getting first team though. I didn't know that. That one is easy enough to make a rule for, I almost did, but didn't think anyone would have won MVP and not a title. I'd draw the line at Finals MVP though. That's not enough. Don't need to be putting in Chauncy and Andre Iguadalla and Jalen Brown, etc. (I mean, maybe Brown eventually, but not yet)

I mean I have Chauncy in my top 50 or 60 guys and it has zero to do with his finals MVP. I also have him well ahead of Butler and Ben Wallace (who makes no sense to be in over Deke and Gobert unless you really value the ring which isn't a terrible choice and to that point). Though winning a title I certainly think should be a factor for the hall, even if it's less for my rankings. But then Dumars doesn't make the hall? Finals MVP, made 3 straight finals, 3x all nba, 6x allstar, and 5x all defense. Was perhaps the second best player on the Bad Boy Pistons? And does Greer's 10x allstar appearances and 7 all nba second teams not mean enough to you? 7 time 2nd team? It was hard cracking the first team with Oscar and West hogging the spots man.

But the issue isn't so much those guys in as someone like Tiny would appear to be an obvious choice with such a bias for first team as he made 3. But go look at his career...I'm not sure he's 'a top 100 player at this point. And we can dig into others on the list, I just picked him as I don't think anyone would take his 3 first teams ahead of all the guys I listed or even for most half.

[Mirotic12]

There's only 206 male players in the Basketball Hall of Fame, and many of those 206 players never played in the NBA (early pioneers, ABA players, college players, Harlem Globetrotters, international players).

A lot of people here complain about international players getting in, but the total amount of international male players in the hall is quite small, at 21. Just 21 international players for all of basketball history.

The amount of international players that never played in the NBA that are in the hall is very small, at just 6. Just 6 in all of basketball history, yet there are posts here all the time saying how any international player with just a good FIBA tournament or just a decent career in Europe "easily gets in." And how any solid player in Europe is basically a shoe in for the hall.

Such claims are complete nonsense. When just 6 such players from all of history are in, that's actually by far and away the group that they are the most strict on in terms of admittance. That's actually the least likely group of players to get in based on facts, and yet the forums talk about that being the most likely group of players to get in.

And with a total of just 14 international male players that played in the NBA being in the hall, that also does not match the claims in these forums. You would expect there to be like over 100 international NBA players in the hall, based on posts in these forums. There are only 14. Just 14 international NBA players. That's it.

This is out of how many hundreds of thousands of players from around the world over the years.

The way this forum talks, you would expect the number of male players in the hall to be like over 10,000.

This is a non issue. The hall is actually incredibly strict, with an incredibly small number of players getting in. There's like 5,000 pro male players in the world at any given time. And look how few are actually in the hall. Even with some guys being in the hall that just played in college, or in old amateur leagues.

And they are not letting in a bunch of NBA players willy nilly, despite what the forums seem to think. It's less than 200 NBA players in the hall, for a league that is almost 80 years old. There have supposedly been around 5,000 NBA players and less than 200 of them are in the hall. Just 14 of them being international players, the group of players that supposedly are "let in so easily".

None of the regular talking points in these forums about the basketball hall of fame are accurate, when they are held up to even the slightest amount of scrutiny.

[scrabbarista]

There's only 206 male players in the Basketball Hall of Fame, and many of those 206 players never played in the NBA (early pioneers, ABA players, college players, Harlem Globetrotters, international players).

A lot of people here complain about international players getting in, but the total amount of international male players in the hall is quite small, at 21. Just 21 international players for all of basketball history.

The amount of international players that never played in the NBA that are in the hall is very small, at just 6. Just 6 in all of basketball history, yet there are posts here all the time saying how any international player with just a good FIBA tournament or just a decent career in Europe "easily gets in." And how any solid player in Europe is basically a shoe in for the hall.

Such claims are complete nonsense. When just 6 such players from all of history are in, that's actually by far and away the group that they are the most strict on in terms of admittance. That's actually the least likely group of players to get in based on facts, and yet the forums talk about that being the most likely group of players to get in.

And with a total of just 14 international male players that played in the NBA being in the hall, that also does not match the claims in these forums. You would expect there to be like over 100 international NBA players in the hall, based on posts in these forums. There are only 14. Just 14 international NBA players. That's it.

This is out of how many hundreds of thousands of players from around the world over the years.

The way this forum talks, you would expect the number of male players in the hall to be like over 10,000.

This is a non issue. The hall is actually incredibly strict, with an incredibly small number of players getting in. There's like 5,000 pro male players in the world at any given time. And look how few are actually in the hall. Even with some guys being in the hall that just played in college, or in old amateur leagues.

And they are not letting in a bunch of NBA players willy nilly, despite what the forums seem to think. It's less than 200 NBA players in the hall, for a league that is almost 80 years old. There have supposedly been around 5,000 NBA players and less than 200 of them are in the hall. Just 14 of them being international players, the group of players that supposedly are "let in so easily".

None of the regular talking points in these forums about the basketball hall of fame are accurate, when they are held up to even the slightest amount of scrutiny.

I could be wrong, but I think 21 minus 6 is 15, not 14.

[Lalouie]

there are a lot of people who dont belong

but for what purpose does this serve. trim the fat?

the problem is there'd be more unnecessarily stupid arguing - wake me up when starks gets in. actually you wouldn't have to. i'd bounce up out of my OWN grave

[Mirotic12]

I could be wrong, but I think 21 minus 6 is 15, not 14.

Yep, it should be 7 international players that didn't play in the NBA, instead of 6.

So, 21 international players overall in the hall of fame, minus 14 international NBA players in the hall of fame, equals 7 non NBA international players in the hall.

Sergei Belov
Kresimir Cosic
Dino Meneghin
Drazen Dalipagic
Bira Maciel
Oscar Schmidt
Radivoj Korac

It's just seven international players that didn't play in the NBA that are in the Basketball Hall of Fame.

And they all had incredible careers. So it's extremely hard to make the basketball hall of fame as a non NBA international player. But the forums make it seem like it's easier for such players to get into the hall of fame than it is for US players. Which is obviously incorrect, when it's just 7 such players that are inducted, and they all had enormous careers.

[og15]

Vince Carter not making a single All-NBA 1st reminds me just how stacked the early 00s was in wing play.

The forward first team spots were constantly taken by guys like KG and Duncan. He was actually voted as a F his two best seasons.

Then 01-02 and 02-03 he's injured and not as productive. Wasn't that great in 03-04. 04-05 he had a chance, but the lackadaisical 20 games in Toronto were not going to let him get in over others.

So there's some positioning as a partial factor, missing a lot of games from injury also a factor, the partial Tor/NJN season, and then we're at mid 00's by then

Maybe he makes one of he's healthier and similarly productive after 01-02, but he didn't have any 1st team level seasons again until his 57 games with NJ.

[Daddy 801]

I’d be down for something called like “The Legends”. And it’s a museum for the absolute best players. Players who changed the game and a ton of memorabilia from those players. Like a Hard Rock Cafe style museum/restaurant/shop/bar of the top 3-4 players from each decade. And it’s owned and operated by the NBA and maybe each year they rent a space where the finals are happening and ship a lot of it to the location so the fans attending the games can go see all the cool stuff from history.

Probably not what the OP was intending, but celebrating the past Legends could be cool.

Also be cool if the past legends talked about our current Legends with some respect and they marketed the new guys like they should….but that’s another topic.

[hugepatsfan]

I don't really see the harm of more guys getting in. Just tells more history of the game. Whatever threshold you set it at you're going to have the guys who just scrape by and they'll be far off from the actual GOAT contender class. Any realistic threshold you set, your last guy in is going to look ridiculous stacked up against MJ or Lebron.

[Myth]

Only if the purpose is to raise the standards. Legit superstars only.