Ben Wallace - HOF?

[Prop]

-= original quote snipped =-



Agreed...

But whether he deserves all 4 or not, he has them, and that had BETTER get him into the HoF, if there's any justice. Same deal with Mutombo and likewise Rodman (though the Worm had "only" 2 DPOYs).

I think that his impact as a defender and rebounder has been sufficient, especially since he won a ring, that he should get there. No matter what you have to say about him, he WAS a pretty legitimate force on that end of the floor.

that's pretty much what i think and why i made the thread. there have been plenty of highly debatable choices for awards...but personal opinion doesn't change the fact.

[Magz50]

Rodman should get in way before Big Ben.

[tsherkin]

If Artis Gilmore can't get into the HOF then there's no way in hell Ben Wallace should be there.

Arits Gilmore SHOULD be in the Hall of Fame, especially since it's not the NBA Hall of Fame, it's the basketball hall of fame. I cannot fathom why he cannot get a vote.

[penbeast0]

-= original quote snipped =-
if a guy who was among the league's most dominant defenders (and recognized as such, repeatedly) for a half decade or so and was known for that throughout his entire career, I think it's a fair deal to send him there. This is a guy who was the defensive anchor for some of the best defensive squads the league has seen, who was a key piece on a title team.

If KC Jones is in as a player, Wallace definitely deserves it.

You have to compare to their peers. HOF lets in a similar number each year. In the early years, the competition wasn't too tough so KC was up against the likes of Andy Phillips or Dick McGuire. There's a lot of 50s/60s players who are in but who don't compare to the later players who never even get consideration.

That said, Ben Wallace is up against the likes of Hakeem, Patrick Ewing, David Robinson, . . . not even including Dikembe or Alonzo who are longer shots for the hall. He isn't a comparable player. Their defensive impacts are similar but their offensive sides are not even in the same ballpark. Even among defensive specialists, Moncrief, Rodman, Bobby Jones, and Dikembe all bring a lot more to the table than Ben despite his DPOYs and of those four, only Rodman has a real shot to make it because of his rebounding (although I'd pick him last of the four in a draft year with all four in it!) I like Ben Wallace but he has close to a zero shot.

[Canomad]

nope. thats my word.

[SalemStoner]

Ben Wallace's career and style of play most similarly imitates Dennis Rodman's play.

They were both at their peaks tremendous defenders and rebounders.

Rodman is probably the best rebounder in NBA history pound for pound, and was a key component in five championship teams.

Wallace was the best rebounder in the league for 2-5 seasons and not by much.

From 91-92 to 97-98 Rodman averaged 18.7, 18.3, 17.3, 16.8, 14.9, 16.1, and 15.0 rebounds per game. Meanwhile, Wallace at his peak - playing in a faster paced league - averaged 15 rpg once, over 13 twice more and hasn't broken 12.5rpg since he turned 29.

Wallace is an excellent defender, but so was Rodman. Rodman won DPOY twice when the league was much more defensive oriented. Wallace won it 4 times in a row. Rodman was all defensive 1st team 7 times; Wallace was 1st team 5 times.

Wallace also is under the misconception that he has a place on offense scoring the ball... Rodman never cared about anything but winning and grabbing boards(and of course wearing the occasional dress).

Honestly I think Rodman had a better, and longer career in addition to being a better player at his peak than Wallace was. I think if you don't have Rodman in the HoF then Wallace has no business being in there...

[jeremy1215]

He doesn't deserve it, and IMO won't get in.

[Doctor MJ]

-= original quote snipped =-



I don't think MVP contention should be a requisite for the Hall, really. The HoF is broken and stupid and useless but if a guy who was among the league's most dominant defenders (and recognized as such, repeatedly) for a half decade or so and was known for that throughout his entire career, I think it's a fair deal to send him there. This is a guy who was the defensive anchor for some of the best defensive squads the league has seen, who was a key piece on a title team.

As far as those who aren't in the Hall, I return to the notion that the Hall is run by idiots and leave it at that. The NBA should have its own Hall that is run by someone with more brainpower than a drunk capybara, but I still think that Wallace deserves it given some of the others who are in.

If KC Jones is in as a player, Wallace definitely deserves it.

David Thompson might have deserved it if he'd played a career instead of 6 seasons of more than 39 games... Let's just say I take a dim view of the consideration the Hall gives.

Ben Wallace has been until recently one of the best help defenders in the last 20 years and only Dikembe Mutombo has been recognized for his defense as often with the DPOY.

Defensive prowess is a skill, no different from scoring; not as gaudy but still critical.

I'm not advocating for scorers over defenders, but the reality is that both are factored in to MVP voting, which is supposed to be the measurement of the players playing the best in the league. If you think Ben was drastically underrated by the MVP voting because of his defensive focus, then I completely understand you want him in the Hall. If you're in favor of putting inferior players in the Hall because they were good at one specialty, I'm pretty sketchy about that.

KC Jones is in the Hall because he was on the 60s Celtics dude. Call me when Ben Wallace has a half dozen rings, and I'll tell you he's a lock for the Hall. Now, if you think KC Jones doesn't deserve it that's fine, but c'mon, the KC didn't get in because he passed an individual threshold, he's there because of his team stuff. Let in every player who was a better individual player than KC and you'd be letting in basically anyone in the past 25 years whose made an all-star game which would obviously make the HOF lose all credibility whatsoever.

[Doctor MJ]

If Artis Gilmore can't get into the HOF then there's no way in hell Ben Wallace should be there.

You're on the other extreme from tsherkin. Artis absolutely should be in the Hall, but he's not being left out because the voters are too strict, as there is frankly a ton of players in the Hall who were not as good as him (including his teammate Dan Issel who was not only obviously not in Artis league when they played together in the ABA, but not the MVP candidate Artis was in the NBA either).

So yeah, if you refuse to let anyone in who was worse than Artis, then I wouldn't vote Patrick Ewing in. I'm not willing to do that.

[kooldude]

^is there any particular reason why Artis Gilmore isn't in the HoF? did he do some Pete Rose-related stuff?

[penbeast0]

Gilmore aside, Wallace just doesn't measure up to the guys he will be competing against for a spot. He certainly isn't in the league of the Olujawon/Robinson/Ewing/Shaq centers; or even the Mourning/Mutumbo centers who are marginal HOF candidates.

He's more the Mark Eaton type and even among guys who will be considered for their defensive prowess, would you really vote for Wallace ahead of Sidney Moncrief, Bobby Jones, or Dennis Rodman (all marginal candidates).

He's just facing way too many better players. BTW, in addition to Artis Gilmore, I'd certainly vote for Mel Daniels ahead of Ben Wallace too.

[tsherkin]

-= original quote snipped =-



I'm not advocating for scorers over defenders, but the reality is that both are factored in to MVP voting, which is supposed to be the measurement of the players playing the best in the league. If you think Ben was drastically underrated by the MVP voting because of his defensive focus, then I completely understand you want him in the Hall. If you're in favor of putting inferior players in the Hall because they were good at one specialty, I'm pretty sketchy about that.

I don't think he was underrrated in the MVP voting at all, no.

KC Jones is in the Hall because he was on the 60s Celtics dude.

I know but he wasn't really good enough to deserve to be in there. A good player, sure, a better coach, absolutely, but not a HoF-caliber player. Ben Wallace deserves to be in the Hall more than KC Jones.

which would obviously make the HOF lose all credibility whatsoever.

It has none to begin with...

[Doctor MJ]

-= original quote snipped =-



It has none to begin with...

However much credibility it has, what you're suggesting would lower that. Understand what I'm saying t? However dumb you think those guys are, if they followed your advice they'd look dumber. You're a real smart guy, but you seem like you're being driven by wanting to hammer those guys rather than actually improve the situation.

[tsherkin]

-= original quote snipped =-



However much credibility it has, what you're suggesting would lower that. Understand what I'm saying t? However dumb you think those guys are, if they followed your advice they'd look dumber. You're a real smart guy, but you seem like you're being driven by wanting to hammer those guys rather than actually improve the situation.

There won't be improvement; the HoF is terrible and always will be, that's to be accepted.

I simply feel that a guy like Wallace deserves to be in the HoF; he's one of two guys in league history with 4 DPOYs (granted, the award has only been around to win since 82-83). He's also the guy who posted the second-highest single-season DRTG of any player...

He does have three top 10 finishes in MVP voting (10, 8 then 7). A couple of rebounding titles (total rebounds, average and defensive rebound rate, as well as one 1st place finish in overall RbR), a blocked shots title (total and average) and a host of top-10 finishes in both. Three consecutive #1 finishes in DRTG, too.

And five consecutive first place finishes in defensive win shares.

This is a guy who was admittedly a peak player but that was mainly to do with role. He was the best defender in the league for a long time, extremely impactful and the defensive centerpiece of a championship team; not on offense, of course, but as the defensive anchor, around whom a suffocating defense was built. That timeframe includes back-to-back trips to the Finals, four straight ECF appearances and a second-round appearance that started it all.

He was an important player and I don't feel that a guy who was defensively focused should be penalized for lack of offense. There are some no-defense players, why not no-offense players?

[Doctor MJ]

He was an important player and I don't feel that a guy who was defensively focused should be penalized for lack of offense. There are some no-defense players, why not no-offense players?

I'm actually fine with a no-offense player if his defense is valuable enough. You've conceded you don't think he was particularly underrated by MVP voting. So the question: Are you saying that you're in favor of Ben making the Hall over people who you consider to be better players?

[Patterns]

From 91-92 to 97-98 Rodman averaged 18.7, 18.3, 17.3, 16.8, 14.9, 16.1, and 15.0 rebounds per game. Meanwhile, Wallace at his peak - playing in a faster paced league - averaged 15 rpg once, over 13 twice more and hasn't broken 12.5rpg since he turned 29.

Wallace is an excellent defender, but so was Rodman. Rodman won DPOY twice when the league was much more defensive oriented. Wallace won it 4 times in a row. Rodman was all defensive 1st team 7 times; Wallace was 1st team 5 times.

Rodman played in a FAR more faster paced league. Wallace played in the East which has been one of the slowest paced East eras in league histiory from 2000-2007.

Rodman played in a run and gun era. The defense was not tighter than 2000-2007.

[penbeast0]

tsherkin, which of the following would you put Ben Wallace in ahead of?

Mutumbo
Mourning
Rodman
Bobby Jones
Sidney Moncrief

[tsherkin]

-= original quote snipped =-



I'm actually fine with a no-offense player if his defense is valuable enough. You've conceded you don't think he was particularly underrated by MVP voting. So the question: Are you saying that you're in favor of Ben making the Hall over people who you consider to be better players?

It would depend on who else was eligible that year.

tsherkin, which of the following would you put Ben Wallace in ahead of?

Mutumbo
Mourning
Rodman
Bobby Jones
Sidney Moncrief

Hmm... good point.

[DASMACKDOWN]

One day he will get in.

[Doctor MJ]

It would depend on who else was eligible that year.

What the heck kind of response is that? I asked you if you'd put Ben in over players you considered better than him. Obviously I know you're not going to put him in over Shaq, the question is whether it'd be something you'd even consider.

I'm just going to assume your answer is 'Yes' unless you say otherwise because I don't know what dilemma there would possibly be if your answer was 'No'. For the record, I don't think 'Yes' is a crazy response, I'm not convinced that it is the right one, but I can understand arguments for it. Specifically: If you see the Hall as a place to demonstrate the best of the various aspects of the game, as opposed to a place to honor the very best players of all time, it'd just be a given you'd want great specialists over good all around guys sometimes.