Is Webber a HOFer?

[pillwenney]

-= original quote snipped =-



Even ignoring the fact the KG has had a longer prime and has missed fewer games during that prime, I don't think that is the case. KG was a much better defender; a better rebounder; his passing was about at good as Webber's; and while he wasn't the scorer Webber was, he was more efficient.

I agree that KG's prime was probably better than Chris's prime, but it came a few years after. I'm saying that during Chris's prime (before KG really hit his IMO), I think Chris was probably better. If you don't, that's fine. My point is that it's debatable.

[sweet daddy]

Chris is the perfect example of a bubble boy for the HOF. Some really great years, was a truly dominant player for a while. On the other hand, lots of injury problems, and never made it to the Finals although he played on some really talented teams. Career totals are very respectable in points, rebounds, blocks. 5 all-star appearances. Overall, it looks really good, but not really great.

He's had the kind of a career that makes you feel like you might be wrong whichever way you lean.

I tend to think no, though. Sorry, Chris.

[TMACPIERCEMARION]

Alot of things not going for him, I love the guy myself and would love to see him go, his knocks though, only 5 all star games, very injury prone, never played over 6 games, and that was his rookie year, and never made it too the big game, no championships, in NCAA or NBA, I hope he makes it, but I just don't think he will.

[Turisas]

ESPN had an interesting stat showing the players who have averaged 20/9/4 in their NBA careers. The list had Wilt, Baylor, Cunningham, Bird, Garnett and Webber. Pretty good company to be associated with.

[Gator Mike]

Nope.

Five All-Star appearances.
One 1st Team All-NBA appearance.
Never a Top 3 finish in MVP voting.
Never a major player on a championship team.
Only led the league in a major statistical category once in his career.

[Entengtot]

when you think of it, i dunno if this can be used as weight, 20 years down the road. can a new generation of players and fans say, wow he is as good as chris webber when it comes to this and that.

being used as a positive measuring stick would be a good indication if chris webber had an impact in the game of basketball. surely that can be said for
ewing
malone, stockton, payton etc.
not being able to get a championship given the level of competition and the great amount of talented players the nba currently should not be a knock on a great player's career.

i think webber influenced the game of basketball in a great way, and made a new kind of power forward in the league with the likes of dirk, kg, barkley who could operate inside out as opposed to the traditional malones, duncan etc.

[Entengtot]

double post

[sacking123]

I am a biased Webber fan so i am gonna say yes he should.

But he won't.
The hall of fame is on your college and pro career.
So Webber can only get in for his pro career because if I'm not mistaken all of his college stats, along with all of Michigan's stats were wiped out.
So in reality the NCAA doesn't even recognise that he had a college career.

[ilikecb4]

I dont think he's a hall of famer.

he had good years in Sacramento and that's it.

He didn't play good anywhere else.

He will be remembered as one of the greats.

If his knees didnt blow, he'd be a lock HOF>

[Chester0]

IMO, he is possibly the most talented player ever to play the game. He had the passing ability of an elite point guard, was more explosive than anyone in today's game (C4, anyone?), was tough down low (on offense at least) and had a good midrange. One of the smartest players I think i've ever seen. Even though he put up some gaudy numbers, he was an underachiever, even in his prime. That's how good he could have been, if you ask me.

There are a lot of different reasons to be in the hall, and I think based on his ability, just his natural talent, he goes in.

[The_Believer]

All-Star appearances are a joke when judging players' HOFs chances. That shouldn't be used as a knock against him. But yes, Webb should be there because he was arguably the best passing and most explosive bigman ever.

[wigglestrue]

If the HOF were determined by the RealGM mob mentality, then no he wouldn't get in. Thankfully, the HOF voters are knowledgeable like RealGM's cream of the crop posters, and he absolutely will get in. I bet most of the people saying no to Webber also think Reggie Miller is a shoo in.

[Ryoga Hibiki]

Are you kiddin' me? Pete Maravich deserves to be in the basketball HoF because of his college career alone: He averaged nearly 45 points per game and is considered by many to be the greatest collegiate basketball player of all time.

He wasn't a bad pro either. He was one of the most exciting players in the game, averaged 24 points per game, was named to five All-NBA teams, and was named to the NBA All 50 team.


http://youtube.com/watch?v=8Y5KAaercTI

Some posters need to learn about basketball history.

Totally agree with the last sentence, people shouldn't base their opionion on hype and youtube mix.

In college Maravich was a great scorer, inefficient, that got no team success at all. I can understand using college for a guy like Walton who was really dominant, not for Maravich.
In the NBA it was even worse, I think the only time he had a winning season it was late in his career as a role player.

A player like that would be called a loser, nowdays, and rightfully soas far as I'm concerned.

[Jemini80]

If you let Webber in off his "insane" stats, then how do you keep other stat padders out like Marbury. Too much of a slippery slope to let Webber in.

[wigglestrue]

-= original quote snipped =-


Totally agree with the last sentence, people shouldn't base their opionion on hype and youtube mix.

In college Maravich was a great scorer, inefficient, that got no team success at all. I can understand using college for a guy like Walton who was really dominant, not for Maravich.
In the NBA it was even worse, I think the only time he had a winning season it was late in his career as a role player.

A player like that would be called a loser, nowdays, and rightfully soas far as I'm concerned.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/ATL/1973.html

Also, if you wanted to avoid being a dumbass, you could have just done some basic fact-checking on wikipedia to counteract whatever youtube hype you think exists.

Maravich was a three time first team All-American and was named The Sporting News' player of the year in 1970, and received the USBWA College Player of the Year and Naismith Award as well. He scored a personal record of 69 points versus Alabama during a game that year, and garnered numerous other awards and college records.

Gee, without YouTube back in those days, how on earth did those organizations not realize Maravich was a loser? I guess they were as caught up in his stat-padding as people today, and they ignored how bad his teams were. Oh wait a second...

Maravich shone on the court and LSU slowly turned around a lackluster program. The year before he arrived, the varsity posted a 3-20 record. In Pete's senior season, LSU was 20-8 and participated in the NIT, where they were defeated by Marquette 101-79 in the semi-finals. Maravich was also a member of Sigma Alpha Epsilon while at LSU.

The fact that some nobody on RealGM has the freaking nerve to call Pete Maravich a loser...I'm going to be using my ignore list a lot more, and every time I see a dumbass thing like that, the person goes on the ignore list. I might wind up only being able to view the posts from 100 or so people, but whatever. I'm just tired of this crap.

If you let Webber in off his "insane" stats, then how do you keep other stat padders out like Marbury. Too much of a slippery slope to let Webber in.

Because people who know better are in charge of HOF voting.

[tnayrbrocks]

Weber should get in no doubt. In his prime he was just as threatening and duncan, kg, etc. His injury prone self also managed to play for 13 seasons which is quite an accomplishment for someone who struggled getting onto the floor, imo.

Are there any players that averaged 20 10 4 who aren't in the hall of fame? He definately has the stats and got close enough to a ring imo.

[Ryoga Hibiki]

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/ATL/1973.html

Also, if you wanted to avoid being a dumbass, you could have just done some basic fact-checking on wikipedia to counteract whatever youtube hype you think exists.

excuse me, he had one winning season (46W...) over his NBA career... that's why I wrote "I think", because I wasn't sure but I knew I wasn't going to be too wrong.

And that's a Marbury-like career, he has just the stats to back him up.

Maravich was a three time first team All-American and was named The Sporting News' player of the year in 1970, and received the USBWA College Player of the Year and Naismith Award as well. He scored a personal record of 69 points versus Alabama during a game that year, and garnered numerous other awards and college records.

three times first all american and once CPotY?
That's nice, but (should) not (be) enough to make it to the HOF, you think it's much better than Christian Laettner's?

[Ryoga Hibiki]

Considering how inefficient he was, Webber's stats weren't even that insane, actually.

[wigglestrue]

excuse me, he had one winning season (46W...) over his NBA career... that's why I wrote "I think", because I wasn't sure but I knew I wasn't going to be too wrong.

And that's a Marbury-like career, he has just the stats to back him up.

The stats, and oh, the respect of professional NBA players and observers.

three times first all american and once CPotY?
That's nice, but (should) not (be) enough to make it to the HOF, you think it's much better than Christian Laettner's?

Maravich had an all-time great NCAA career and a really good NBA career.

Considering how inefficient he was, Webber's stats weren't even that insane, actually.

So you think throwing around a phrase like "inefficient" makes you appear knowledgeable? It doesn't. You don't know anything. Taking you off ignore to see what you'd posted was a mistake. Back on. Bye.

[KyleCleric]

I may not like Webber, but I have no doubt he should be a hall of famer. There were many years where he was a dominant player in the NBA, right there with KG, Duncan, and Shaq. For the first 10 or 12 years of his career he was at worst one of the top 30 players in the league with a couple of times argued as high as second. His best years may not have been this decade, but that doesn't mean he doesn't have a spot in the hall of fame.