Bosh not a finalist for HoF

[Najee12]

I’m a huge Chris Bosh fan and I despise TMac, and even I don’t have a problem with TMac being their first. He was the better player.

Dominque Wilkins was passed over for years, that was a joke, and Chris Webber is still waiting and he retired long before Bosh did.

Dominique Wilkins got inducted into the Naismith Memorial Basketball Hall of Fame on his second try.

There was plenty of outrage when Wilkins did not get inducted on the first ballot, where people such as Charles Barkley criticized how difficult it was at the time for NBA players such as Wilkins to get inducted while college coaches and obscure international players were getting inducted on the first time.

For a better case for top U.S.-born NBA players who struggled to get into the Naismith Memorial Basketball Hall of Fame, look at Adrian Dantley (who got inducted 12 years after becoming eligible five years after retirement) and Artis Gilmore (who got inducted 18 years after becoming eligible five years after retirement).

[Najee12]

I'm trying to find an analog player and not use a player who is so completely superior to Vlade, like Webber or Terry Cummings to make my point. Which is, an inferior player is in the hall because he was born in (then) Yugoslavia.

Probably the best U.S.-born and -bred NBA player who lines up with Vlade Divac is someone like Alvan Adams, a good complementary player who was a solid passer for a center, probably a better scorer but not quite the shot-blocking presence for the 1970s and 1980s Suns (career averages: 14 points, 7 rebounds and 4.1 assists per game). Like Divac, Adams has one All-Star Game selection, no all-NBA selections and consistently was considered a top 50-type player during his best years.

For that matter, Divac's numbers are not that much different from Brad Miller's (11.2 points, 7.1 rebounds per game over 16 years). Miller even played in a couple of All-Star Games, compared to the more popular Divac's one.

Players like Noah, Bill Laimbeer, Brad Daugherty who are all as good if not better than Divacs won't sniff the hall because they are American and played in the NBA their entire careers. If Laimbeer had been born in Yugoslavia he'd be in the hall of fame because of the stupid reasons I outlined above. I think it's dumb. If Noah had won 2 national titles and decided to play in Europe in France he'd have been dominant.

I'm all for an international contributor wing, but Divacs next to Kareem, Shaq, Hakeem and Russell is a sad joke.

The problem I have with the Divac induction is he played a full NBA career (16 years), from his early 20s until his later 30s. In that respect, he is no different than a U.S.-born player who played a full career in the NBA. It's not like Divac played internationally and then came to the NBA at a later age, playing only a handful of years.

If people evaluate Divac in the context of his NBA career exclusively, then no one can argue he should be in the Naismith Memorial Hall of Fame. He was an above-average NBA player, a complementary player on solid (Charlotte) to very good teams (Lakers at the end of the Showtime era; early 2000s Sacramento). But he never received league accolades despite having a relatively high profile (playing on the Lakers with Magic Johnson; playing on a Sacramento team that was considered a contender).

I would have to say Divac was a lesser player than Brad Daughterty (five-time all-star, 20-10-4 player before injuries derailed his career) and very likely Bill Laimbeer (seven times in the top 10 in rebounding, led the NBA in rebounds twice, slightly better scorer, at least as good defensively). Divac is a better offensive player than Joakin Noah but Noah was a more versatile defender. I may rate Divac as better than Noah, but it's not by much.

[Najee12]

Again, it's not an NBA hall of fame, and basketball exists outside of the US. So why would there be a dedicated section to great international players?

Maybe it should be the basketball hall of fame and there is a special section for "Great American Players"?

Basketball has become an international sport but its popularity and dominance start and reside in the United States, a phenomenon that has existed for decades. The overall competition in the United States is much steeper than in other countries; it's only been in recent years that foreign countries started beating the United States' college all-star teams regularly.

The NBA is far and away the top professional basketball league in the world. It's also the most influential and has the majority of the top-level players, even with the emergence of international players.

P.S. Dino Radja was putting up decent numbers on some bad Boston teams led by Chris Ford and M.L. Carr. The Celtics never won more than 35 games in a season during Radja's four years. The fourth-leading scorer for the 1993-94 team was a 40-year-old Robert Parish, then a fading Dominique Wilkins was the team's leading scorer in 1994-95.

[dhsilv2]

Influencer, international pioneer or something. Spreaders. I don't care but don't tell me Ubiratan is better than Tom Chambers. It's not a huge deal, but it just makes the hall laughable. American college is another issue, it weighs on players but no clear guidance is given on how much it should matter. Clearly if it weighed as much as the NBA a guy like Christian Laettner would be in.

Regarding Yao, I'd say he falls more in the Walton camp of injury shortened. Yao did spread teh game but he made 5 All-NBA teams and was utterly dominant. He's not rotation level starter Dino Radja.

Wait....you really think Tom Chambers is a better basketball player than Vlade? REALLY???

Every metric is going to show Vlade was better. His game was then and now ideal for winning basketball. A strong top tier rim protector, good hands, and overall could anchor a top level defense. On offense he was among the best passing bigs of all time when he retired, a tier below say Walton and Sabonis, but he combined that with a jump shot out to near 3 point range to space the floor, and he was a pretty good post player. Hes one of the most complete players ever and could have slotted onto nearly any team and add value.

Chambers was a good scorer who had two actual allstar level seasons (89 and 90).

Vlade's Kings years alone should have him over Chambers.

Tom Chambers is at least as good as Vlade, he made all nba twice. 4 all-star games aren't that special compared with Vlade's 1. Vlade's team defense surely was better but Chambers scoring was vastly superior to Divacs. What today's game is now doesn't impact hall of fame worthiness, the rules weren't remotely the same, trying to factor in an old players game through the lens of today's game and rules is absurd.

I'm trying to find an analog player and not use a player who is so completely superior to Vlade, like Webber or Terry Cummings to make my point. Which is, an inferior player is in the hall because he was born in (then) Yugoslavia.

Players like Noah, Bill Laimbeer, Brad Daugherty who are all as good if not better than Divacs won't sniff the hall because they are American and played in the NBA their entire careers. If Laimbeer had been born in Yugoslavia he'd be in the hall of fame because of the stupid reasons I outlined above. I think it's dumb. If Noah had won 2 national titles and decided to play in Europe in France he'd have been dominant.

I'm all for an international contributor wing, but Divacs next to Kareem, Shaq, Hakeem and Russell is a sad joke.

Laimbeer is actually a fairly good comp to Vlade. And again we agree with the idea that without international play, Vlade wouldn't make the hall. But neither he nor Laimbeer are grossly worse than a great many players in the hall already.

But here's the thing, how many guys like a Laimbeer could have become the international impact level people that Vlade became? Would Laimbeer have even played basketball and if so would he have left his home and come to American back when that wasn't a thing and had the same impact in the NBA and on the game outside of the US? Vlade really was one of the early guys who really helped open up the international to nba trend we see today. In just looking at his very good, but not star level nba play, I think you're missing just how hard it was to accomplish what he did. i also think with the Chambers comp, you're under valuing vlade.

Just for some high level context, no I'm not comparing Vlade to just how the game is played today, but using what we know leads to winning to his own era.

https://sites.google.com/site/rapmstats/2002-rapm
https://sites.google.com/site/rapmstats/2003-rapm
https://sites.google.com/site/rapmstats/2004-rapm

Here are his last 3 years the only year we full the full RAPM data. 6th, 6th and 37th. Sure limited minutes, sure there's context, and by no means was he a top 10 player in those seasons. But he was FAR more important to those kings teams than people give him credit for. And in an era of a lot of all time great big men, he was absolutely just a tier behind the likes of Hakeem, Deke, Robinson, etc as a defender (unless you rank those guys in different tiers and then sure there's room to get more nuanced here). In that era we didn't correctly value passing from anyone but point guards (where we over valued it). Vlade was a good solid impact offensive player and a high impact defender. He likely was a top 30 player per minute nearly his entire career. ~12 quality seasons like that and that's a career that should get some thought as to being in the hall by the standards we've seen set. Now again we agree without the international stuff he isn't a hall guy, but he was an extremely good player and he absolutely is better than a lot of the early entrants to the hall, many of the historical guys, etc.

Some of the other international guys maybe were too poor of players to be in the hall, but Vlade getting extra credit for his role in the league doesn't seem like a big step at all given his historical significance elsewhere. It isn't like he got in for winning a bunch of euro league mvp's and nothing else. He was a pioneer just like many africian american athletes were in basketball and other sports.

[dhsilv2]

I've explained why vlade was what he was and you made some absurd leap to claim I was comparing him to joker. But look we've done this enough. You see basketball the way people did 30 years ago and I don't. This isn't worth discussing further.

No, the difference is I actually saw Vlade Divac play (including literally as a journalist covering him when he was with the Charlotte Hornets) and you didn't. You have to use all metrics and measures of primary and secondary research to get a full picture of a player, ranging from observation and performance to using counting and advanced numbers, league honors, scouting reports, etc.

What is absurd is you trying to reinvent history that Divac was more than a complementary player throughout his career and trying to argue he was one of the top 100 players in NBA history, when during his playing days he struggled to rate among the top 50 players in the NBA. You're acting like Divac was something along the lines of Nikola Jokic (dominant, all-NBA type player) when he was a complementary player on whatever he played.

Given the long, extensive 75-year history of the NBA, such a top 100 list would consist of players who played or excelled at exceptionally high levels for extended periods. Divac never came remotely close to being such a player (Divac is more like top 2000 in NBA history). It's not discussing further with someone who continues to make inane comments.

He made the board's top 100 list last time we did it. If you don't like it, I don't care. We don't agree on how to evaluate basketball players and given you were a journalist, I'm not exactly likely to give you the benefit of the doubt here.

[BigtimeNBAfan]

I do wish there would be a concrete line in the sand of what puts you in the hall of fame. Even if that concrete line isn't a flat out rule, it is an unspoken rule of what you need to do to get in the hall of fame. For example baseball if you hit 500 home runs you are going to get in or if you hit 3,000 hits you are in, etc. . . Chris Bosh would have got to 20,000 points had he not had health issues, but unfortunately that is life for some pro athletes. Brandon Roy would have been a hall of famer had he been healthy, but unfortunately you can't put someone in the Hall for what they might have done. Grant Hill might have been a top 10 player ever if he had not had health issues.

[Najee12]

He made the board's top 100 list last time we did it. If you don't like it, I don't care. We don't agree on how to evaluate basketball players and given you were a journalist, I'm not exactly likely to give you the benefit of the doubt here.

Well, posting on your phone while taking a 15-minute break from working at Jimmy John's doesn't make you knowledgeable on the NBA. Nor does posting on a message board where a bunch of people is pulling out numbers without context makes you credible.

Seriously, Eddie Jones ranks at No. 41 in VORP, Elvin Hayes is ranked at No. 172 and George Gervin is ranked at No. 173. No one who has any knowledge of NBA history through all objective measures and using all forms of primary and secondary research is going to make an argument that Jones was some superior player to Hayes and Gervin.

[The Real Dalic]

Sucks for CB as he's one of the nicest guys in the NBA. Wouldn't have minded him in the first ballot, but there were some absolute legends in this class.

[nedleeds]

Tom Chambers is at least as good as Vlade, he made all nba twice. 4 all-star games aren't that special compared with Vlade's 1. Vlade's team defense surely was better but Chambers scoring was vastly superior to Divacs. What today's game is now doesn't impact hall of fame worthiness, the rules weren't remotely the same, trying to factor in an old players game through the lens of today's game and rules is absurd.

This person has made a lot of dumb takes before, especially about players he/she never saw play. No one who saw Vlade Divac play on any level can make an argument that Divac was more than a complementary player. The fact he/she is arguing Divac is one of the top 100 players in NBA history solely based on win shares proves how out of context this argument is.

But then again, I've seen this person make other inane arguments. It has nothing to do with hypotheticals and not using both primary and secondary forms of research. It's reinventing history.

Maybe it's vlades crazy uncle with a burner account.

[dhsilv2]

He made the board's top 100 list last time we did it. If you don't like it, I don't care. We don't agree on how to evaluate basketball players and given you were a journalist, I'm not exactly likely to give you the benefit of the doubt here.

Well, posting on your phone taking a 15-minute break from working at Jimmy John's doesn't make you knowledgeable on the NBA. Nor does posting on a message board where a bunch of people is pulling out numbers without context makes you credible.

Seriously, Eddie Jones ranks at No. 41 in VORP, Elvin Hayes is ranked at No. 172 and George Gervin is ranked at No. 173. No one who has any knowledge of NBA history through all objective measures and using all forms of primary and secondary research is going to make an argument that Jones was some superior player to Hayes and Gervin.

You do why those guys rank poorly on VORP right? Like nobody has ever used those metrics iwth those players...like you are legit the first one ever to do so.

[Najee12]

There's a reason (Vlade Divac) is top 100 in WS and top 50 in VORP. He was that good.

Eddie Jones is No. 41 in VORP.
Kawhi Leonard is No. 91 in VORP.
Elvin Hayes is No. 172 in VORP.
George Gervin is No. 173 VORP.

Tell me in what universe is Eddie Jones considered a superior player to these three players, based on your use of this statistic.

[dhsilv2]

There's a reason (Vlade Divac) is top 100 in WS and top 50 in VORP. He was that good.

Eddie Jones is No. 41 in VORP.
Giannis Antetokounmpo is No. 106 in VORP.
Elvin Hayes is No. 172 in VORP.
George Gervin is No. 173 VORP.

Tell me in what universe is Eddie Jones considered a superior player to these three players, based on your use of this statistic.

Hayes and Gervin don't get measured by this metric.

Giannis has just started his career...

What in the hell are you talking about?

[Najee12]

There's a reason (Vlade Divac) is top 100 in WS and top 50 in VORP. He was that good.

Vlade Divac is No. 39 in VORP.
Giannis Antetokounmpo is No. 106 in VORP.

Tell me in what universe is Vlade Divac considered a superior player to Giannis, based on your use of this statistic.

[dhsilv2]

There's a reason (Vlade Divac) is top 100 in WS and top 50 in VORP. He was that good.

Vlade Divac is No. 39 in VORP.
Giannis Antetokounmpo is No. 106 in VORP.

Tell me in what universe is Vlade Divac considered a superior player to Giannis based on your use of this statistic.

Again...what are you talking about? nobody is going to take vorp and take a guy at what 25 and compare him to a full career. Nobody is going to take one stat and use the rankings from it in raw form without context either. And nobody who's ever looked at any basketball stats is going to discuss career vorp of guys from the 60's.

I've already covered why vlade's skills lead to these metrics and where I rank him. If you want to address the actual basketball, I'm not going to teach you basic basketball stats.

But please read this before you continue to discuss VORP

https://www.basketball-reference.com/about/bpm.html#vorp

[AussieCeltic]

Again, it's not an NBA hall of fame, and basketball exists outside of the US. So why would there be a dedicated section to great international players?

Maybe it should be the basketball hall of fame and there is a special section for "Great American Players"?

Basketball has become an international sport but its popularity and dominance start and reside in the United States, a phenomenon that has existed for decades. The overall competition in the United States is much steeper than in other countries; it's only been in recent years that foreign countries started beating the United States' college all-star teams regularly.

The NBA is far and away the top professional basketball league in the world. It's also the most influential and has the majority of the top-level players, even with the emergence of international players.

P.S. Dino Radja was putting up decent numbers on some bad Boston teams led by Chris Ford and M.L. Carr. The Celtics never won more than 35 games in a season during Radja's four years. The fourth-leading scorer for the 1993-94 team was a 40-year-old Robert Parish, then a fading Dominique Wilkins was the team's leading scorer in 1994-95.

It was his body of work outside of the USA that got him into the HOF.

He won a Silver medal with Yugoslavia but the big one was a Silver medal with Croatia in the 1992 Olympics once Croatia was independent. He also won 2x Golds at the EuroBasket in 89/91.. There are plenty of junior medals as well.

He also won 2x Euro titles, 2x greek league titles (1x finals MVP), 3x Yugoslav champion, 2x Croatian league winner...

[Najee12]

There's a reason (Vlade Divac) is top 100 in WS and top 50 in VORP. He was that good.

Shawn Marion is No. 30 in VORP.
Steve Nash is No. 102 in VORP.

Considering the narrative people have used for years to elevate Nash ("he made Marion and Amar'e Stoudamire better players"), could you explain how Marion ranks in the top 30 in this category if he needed Nash to elevate him? Didn't Nash win two league MVPs based on this logic he elevated Marion and other players? So why is Marion smoking Nash in this category?

Shawn Marion is No. 30 in VORP.
Julius Erving is No. 31 in VORP.

Seriously, do you really believe Marion was on the same level as Dr. J?

[Najee12]

It was his body of work outside of the USA that got him into the HOF.

He won a Silver medal with Yugoslavia but the big one was a Silver medal with Croatia in the 1992 Olympics once Croatia was independent. He also won 2x Golds at the EuroBasket in 89/91.. There are plenty of junior medals as well.

He also won 2x Euro titles, 2x greek league titles (1x finals MVP), 3x Yugoslav champion, 2x Croatian league winner...

I'm well aware of what Dino Radja did in those leagues outside of the NBA. it doesn't change the fact he was an OK player in the NBA, which was considerably more competitive than the international leagues in the 1990s.

[AussieCeltic]

It was his body of work outside of the USA that got him into the HOF.

He won a Silver medal with Yugoslavia but the big one was a Silver medal with Croatia in the 1992 Olympics once Croatia was independent. He also won 2x Golds at the EuroBasket in 89/91.. There are plenty of junior medals as well.

He also won 2x Euro titles, 2x greek league titles (1x finals MVP), 3x Yugoslav champion, 2x Croatian league winner...

I'm well aware of what Dino Radja did in those leagues outside of the NBA. it doesn't change the fact he was an OK player in the NBA, which was considerably more competitive than the international leagues in the 1990s.

The HOF is NOT an NBA award. Americans always downplay any international achievements.

[Najee12]

The HOF is NOT an NBA award. Americans always downplay any international achievements.

It's because the international leagues have had players come from other leagues and struggle in the NBA. Then in the case of players like Dino Radja, they go back to those leagues, become standouts and they are inducted.

Or there are some players who become OK longtime NBA players but get inducted because they were born overseas (Vlade Divac). They are allowed some leverage from where they can pull from multiple pools of experience (international play, NBA) to make their candidacy stronger. With the U.S.-born and -bred NBA players, their international experience is an afterthought at best.

In Radja's case, he can pull from his international resume more than his NBA experience because he was an OK NBA player, although having that NBA experience does boost the resume. With Divac, he can say he was an international player even though he played in the NBA for 16 years and was nothing more than a solid complementary player. Really, do you think if Divac was Vincent Davis from Cleveland, he would have been inducted?

By this logic, Stephon Marbury should be a lock for the Naismith Memorial Basketball Hall of Fame based on what he accomplished overseas after a better NBA career compared to Radja. I better not hear any pushback on Marbury when he becomes eligible.

[AMW27]

Sucks for CB as he's one of the nicest guys in the NBA. Wouldn't have minded him in the first ballot, but there were some absolute legends in this class.

Well what if Duncan Kobe and Garnett retired in 2017 instead of 2016. I still dont think Bosh would've gotten in on the first ballot.