REDOING THE NBA HALL OF FAME (retired in 1965 or earlier)

[Owly]

I think he talks about having a no defense rep in "Tall Tales" and I know that in his later career, they were platooning him with Sanders who was a defensive specialist with no offense, so I have always had the picture of Heinsohn not being focused on that end. Not sure about high motor, what I have heard was motor mouth . . . hyper and never shut up and maybe that translates to high motor on the floor.

May see if I can find a source. As I recall the fact that he couldn't go long was put down to how much he smoked (don't know how much this was from the time or realized afterwards) but seemed to go with a suggestion he did go hard.

[Dutchball97]

Bob Pettit
Dolph Schayes
Paul Arizin
Bill Sharman
Tom Heinsohn
Frank Ramsey
Larry Foust
Clyde Lovelette
Gene Shue
Maurice Stokes

Pettit, Schayes, Arizin and Sharman are the locks here for me. Out of the next group of guys I prefer Heinsohn, Ramsey, Foust, Lovelette and Shue (who I'm surprised nobody mentioned yet) over the likes of Braun and Sears. I'm using my last pick for Stokes, who might've had a short career but shined brightly and left a definite impact on the league. Even though I didn't vote for him last round I feel like he does deserve it.

[Owly]

OK, what follows is just my initial brain-storming list; I'll post a clearly official vote later.

Among the new candidates......

The "so obvious there is literally no case whatsoever to not include them" choices:
Bob Pettit
Dolph Schayes
Paul Arizin
probably Bill Sharman, too

The "pretty obvious, don't think I need to elaborate upon them" choices:
Clyde Lovellette
probably Tom Heinsohn


I know Jack George retired in 1961, but I don't think he's really a serious candidate.
Frank Ramsey needs some consideration, though he's far from a lock imo. Will toss him in with the pool of prior candidates who didn't get in the last round. Oh!, and Carl Braun, too. Not a lock, but needs serious consideration, imo.
Is there any other new candidate I'm missing?

If not, then my top candidates for those final 4 spots are:

Frank Ramsey
Carl Braun
Arnie Risen
Dick McGuire
Joe Fulks
Max Zaslofsky
Andy Phillip
Maurice Stokes

Hmm.......among those^^^ I'm leaning toward Risen, Braun, probably Fulks, and.......??
Zaslofsky or Stokes feel like the most "relevant" from a historical narrative sense, though some of the other candidates arguably had more significant careers in a strictly basketball-related sense. Side-note: I feel like Andy Phillip is a player history sort of sleeps on; looks like an awfully good player for the time-period, though. 11-year career, PER over those final 7 seasons was 13.5 (which is higher than all but ONE season Slater Martin had, for example), led the league in apg three times (twice during seasons Bob Cousy was around for); looked to be on his way to a fourth consecutive season before being traded to Fort Wayne, too. Perhaps worth noting the Warriors offense in '52 (with Phillip, Arizin, and later career Joe Fulks) was a +2.6 rORTG, and then with losing Arizin and Phillip [well, Phillip played 13 games before being traded] they fell off a cliff to -4.1 rORTG, despite Neil Johnston coming into his prime that year.

otoh
Foust?

Sears for the long list at least? (one year leading in WS/48 iirc)

If Fulks, Feerick if not at all narrative driven, pure player ranking ballot, (if "significance" to narrative history is any factor I'll leave it)

[Dutchball97]

For people doubting the inclusion of Frank Ramsey I'd like to point to the 1959 play-offs. In the regular season he was the 5th guy behind Russell, Cousy, Sharman and Heinsohn but in the play-offs he was the team's leading scorer and had a whopping .322 WS/48.

[penbeast0]

Tommy Heinsohn v. Kenny Sears

For Heinsohn, the key is scoring volume. Heinsohn averaged 18.6 ppg over 9 years in Boston in 29.4 mpg. 8.8 reb (super fast pace but played next to Russell) and 2.0 assists. Note that that is playing in Boston with the fastest pace and most possessions in the league. Only his last year shows any sign of dropping off, he was pretty much the same player throughout. The downside is his TS% over that period was only .460 as he was an inefficient gunner who didn't go to the line that much (5.1 fta)

For Sears, the key is scoring efficiency. Sears played a bit less and he did drop off once he left the Knicks but in his prime years in NY, despite coming into the league earlier and finishing his prime earlier than Heinsohn during the era when league scoring efficiency was rapidly rising, his scoring efficiency was almost a hundred points higher .548 for career, .545 for prime! He led the league in FG% twice as a jump shooting combo forward and his FTA attempts (6.5 to 5.1) and FT% (.841/.825 in NY v. .790 for Heinsohn) are both superior. In 7 years in New York, he averaged 16.2/9.2/1.8 in 32 mpg so similar rebounding but a more willing passer as well as being appreciably more efficient (again, dropping off a bit in his final Knicks year).

I just can't see Heinsohn being a better player unless Owly finds some evidence of a major defensive difference. Heinsohn gets appreciably more press for being lucky enough to play on the Boston dynasty team and being a longtime broadcaster and coach but Sears was one of the unsung stars of his era.

.

.

.

.

[eminence]

How many players are we supposed to vote for here?

[penbeast0]

10 will be selected but you can vote for as few (or I guess as many) as you want.

[trex_8063]

OK, what follows is just my initial brain-storming list; I'll post a clearly official vote later.

Among the new candidates......

The "so obvious there is literally no case whatsoever to not include them" choices:
Bob Pettit
Dolph Schayes
Paul Arizin
probably Bill Sharman, too

The "pretty obvious, don't think I need to elaborate upon them" choices:
Clyde Lovellette
probably Tom Heinsohn


I know Jack George retired in 1961, but I don't think he's really a serious candidate.
Frank Ramsey needs some consideration, though he's far from a lock imo. Will toss him in with the pool of prior candidates who didn't get in the last round. Oh!, and Carl Braun, too. Not a lock, but needs serious consideration, imo.
Is there any other new candidate I'm missing?

If not, then my top candidates for those final 4 spots are:

Frank Ramsey
Carl Braun
Arnie Risen
Dick McGuire
Joe Fulks
Max Zaslofsky
Andy Phillip
Maurice Stokes

Hmm.......among those^^^ I'm leaning toward Risen, Braun, probably Fulks, and.......??
Zaslofsky or Stokes feel like the most "relevant" from a historical narrative sense, though some of the other candidates arguably had more significant careers in a strictly basketball-related sense. Side-note: I feel like Andy Phillip is a player history sort of sleeps on; looks like an awfully good player for the time-period, though. 11-year career, PER over those final 7 seasons was 13.5 (which is higher than all but ONE season Slater Martin had, for example), led the league in apg three times (twice during seasons Bob Cousy was around for); looked to be on his way to a fourth consecutive season before being traded to Fort Wayne, too. Perhaps worth noting the Warriors offense in '52 (with Phillip, Arizin, and later career Joe Fulks) was a +2.6 rORTG, and then with losing Arizin and Phillip [well, Phillip played 13 games before being traded] they fell off a cliff to -4.1 rORTG, despite Neil Johnston coming into his prime that year.

otoh
Foust?

Sears for the long list at least? (one year leading in WS/48 iirc)

If Fulks, Feerick if not at all narrative driven, pure player ranking ballot, (if "significance" to narrative history is any factor I'll leave it)

Holy cow, Larry Foust. I'm actually a little embarrassed I forgot him (though I don't presently have access to my docs and records); thank you. He's pretty much a lock for me, more or less same tier has Heinsohn imo.
Too bad for the other candidates; that reduces things to just three remaining spots to decide upon among 7-9 additional candidates. Kenny Sears is a good mention; didn't think of him either and he's worth a little consideration. I'll think about Feerick, but tbh, with only a 4-year career (basically ALL of which occurred in the BAA), and lacking Fulks's "narrative", his chances might be slim. I am going to rethink my thinking, though.

[Owly]

I think he talks about having a no defense rep in "Tall Tales" and I know that in his later career, they were platooning him with Sanders who was a defensive specialist with no offense, so I have always had the picture of Heinsohn not being focused on that end. Not sure about high motor, what I have heard was motor mouth . . . hyper and never shut up and maybe that translates to high motor on the floor.

May see if I can find a source. As I recall the fact that he couldn't go long was put down to how much he smoked (don't know how much this was from the time or realized afterwards) but seemed to go with a suggestion he did go hard.

Not quite what I'm recalling (my memory is of a book, it's not in Ever Green - Give 'em the Hook, a source iirc for Tall Tales has Russell making defense easier, allowing him to focus more on offense - other thing is you an tell he was a coach, thought about the game). Think that's the main Celtics book I took in but there are (and I've read) a few plus general basketball histories have a fair amount on the Celtics so doubt I'll find it even if it is real ...

but semi-adjacent is
"Known for his hard-nosed style of play" (https://www.nba.com/history/legends/profiles/tom-heinsohn). That and much of the following sound/are slightly more sacrifice/toughness than effort though.

From Tall Tales ... There's throwing elbows and a fight with Meschery in Tall Tales (either two fights or Meschery repeats himself), and him standing in the way of Wilt when he's getting back on D. The one defensive semi-shot at him (though more as praise for Sanders is Schaus "Our eyes would light up when Heinsohn came in for Sanders. Heinsohn could shoot, but we were grateful to get Sanders out of the game." Ryan: "guy would get a defensive rebound and Tommy would sneak in from behind and take the ball away."
Twyman says "You knew that if you got by Cousy or Heinsohn, that SOB Russell was back there waiting to block your shot" but I'm not reading that as a shot at those two.

[kipper34]

From what I've seen Heinsohn was a slightly below average defender but everybody looked better on that end playing next to Russell. He had quick hands and some versatility being able to switch onto a few different positions. Generally not a very smart defender and was a step slow on understanding assignments or navigating screens. But obviously there's limited footage.

My 10 are Bob Pettit, Dolph Schayes, Paul Arizin, Bill Sharman, Clyde Lovelette, Tommy Heinsohn, Larry Foust, Maurice Stokes, Joe Fulks, Frank Ramsey

Frank Ramsey's a tough player to judge but I feel like him being the league's first real 6th man and the significance of that puts him in.

EDIT: Adding Fulks to the 10

[worldjbfree]

In a reverse of the initial round, I'm going high-and-tight:

Paul Arizin
Bob Pettit
Dolph Schayes
Bill Sharman

As tiebreakers are needed, I'll return to help out.

[Doctor MJ]

Hey folks, thought others might find this to be a useful tool for finding things to focus on and understand:

Retro POY Voting

We went originally went from 2010 back to 1955 (The Shot-Clock, or Post-Mikan, Era).

Let me know if you have any questions.

[Dr Positivity]

I understand some of penbeast's criticisms about Heinsohn t he was still an important part to the greatest dynasty ever. What makes a lock to me is I'm pretty sure he wins 1957 Finals MVP if they have the award. He had 37 and 23 in game 7 which they won by 2 points. 1959 finals MVP I can't really figure out who would win between Heinsohn, Ramsey, Cousy, Sharman or Russell but he has a case for a 2nd unofficial Finals MVP. I think this is a good example of a player who wouldn't have been HOF on another team who gets in due to playing on elite team.

I'm not really feeling a lot of guys after Pettit, Arizin, Sharman, Schayes and Heinsohn. Lovellette I guess would have to get in for this pool, but he's still a player with a solo 2nd team All NBA and no top 10 MVP finishes. A lot of these guys like Guerin, Shue, Sears are playing on some irrelevant teams. I'll let some others make cases.

[trex_8063]

Tommy Heinsohn v. Kenny Sears

For Heinsohn, the key is scoring volume. Heinsohn averaged 18.6 ppg over 9 years in Boston in 29.4 mpg. 8.8 reb (super fast pace but played next to Russell) and 2.0 assists. Note that that is playing in Boston with the fastest pace and most possessions in the league. Only his last year shows any sign of dropping off, he was pretty much the same player throughout. The downside is his TS% over that period was only .460 as he was an inefficient gunner who didn't go to the line that much (5.1 fta)

For Sears, the key is scoring efficiency. Sears played a bit less and he did drop off once he left the Knicks but in his prime years in NY, despite coming into the league earlier and finishing his prime earlier than Heinsohn during the era when league scoring efficiency was rapidly rising, his scoring efficiency was almost a hundred points higher .548 for career, .545 for prime! He led the league in FG% twice as a jump shooting combo forward and his FTA attempts (6.5 to 5.1) and FT% (.841/.825 in NY v. .790 for Heinsohn) are both superior. In 7 years in New York, he averaged 16.2/9.2/1.8 in 32 mpg so similar rebounding but a more willing passer as well as being appreciably more efficient (again, dropping off a bit in his final Knicks year).

I just can't see Heinsohn being a better player unless Owly finds some evidence of a major defensive difference. Heinsohn gets appreciably more press for being lucky enough to play on the Boston dynasty team and being a longtime broadcaster and coach but Sears was one of the unsung stars of his era.

.

.

.

.

No full reply here, just one question for now: when NY Sears avg fewer apg in GREATER mpg, why are you labeling him a MORE willing passer?

[penbeast0]

Because I screwed up and misread the numbers. What else?

Ignore that. You have two scorers. Neither provides much else above average. One averages 18+ppg on poor efficiency but is on multiple championship teams, albeit not as one of their top 3 players (I'd rate him 4th to 8th depending on the year). One averages 16+ppg on extremely good efficiency but plays for weak teams.

Is Heinsohn really a better or even more valuable player or just one that was lucky to get drafted by the Celtics. If the Celtics trade for Ken Sears the way they did for Bailey Howell, is Sears the HOF player and Heinsohn the forgotten one? I just don't see Heinsohn as being even arguably better than Sears (then I will look at him v. other players for a lower spot on my list).

[eminence]

Agreeing with everyone else there are 4 real locks here - Pettit, Schayes, Arizin, Sharman. I'll probably wind up putting another Celtic or two in, I generally believe in honoring the dynasties. Not sure if I'll extend beyond that, the second tier guys here look similar to Arnie Risen and that level which I think I feel more comfortable with just out of the Hall. Carl Braun is a guy I might give some love, generally give those early guys a fair amount credit for missing seasons due to military service. A pair I'm not loving - Dukes and Shue, those Pistons were just bad season after season.

[Doctor MJ]

Alright here's where I am to this point.

First, the 4 locks:

Bill Sharman
Dolph Schayes
Paul Arizin
Bob Pettit

After that it gets really tough. Here are the next 6 of the new guys for me at this point:

Larry Costello - strong point guard for a good long time, I find myself surprised he isn't getting more love
Frank Ramsey & Tommy Heinsohn - I can get with putting Ramsey over Heinsohn, pretty debatable, but I think they both make it
Clyde Lovellette - mixed on him, defense seems like a big problem, but he was a major part of good teams for a good while
Larry Foust - When on Lovellette's team, Lovellette was higher in the pecking order, do his earlier years make up for it?
Carl Braun - solid point guard for a very long time

I also looked at Kenny Sears & Gene Shue, but at this point, they wouldn't make the cut.

At this point the question is how to compared the "2nd ballot" guys to the first. This is a place where I'll probably wait and see where the wind is blowing. I'm not interested in "fighting the good fight" but don't want to abandon a guy I personally think should be in the Hall.

2 of my votes last time didn't make the cut: Arnie Risen & Joe Fulks. I might end up voting for them over the bottom two of the list above (so far Foust & Braun).

I'll also mention Maurice Stokes. I'd say of anybody after the 4 locks, Stokes was probably the best player. It's only 3 seasons...but I find myself thinking he may have been better in all 3 seasons than any of those other guys, and so it's a question of just how much the longevity matters. But I also have to admit, it'd be easier to ignore the longevity issues if Stokes had actually played for teams that were actually successful. He's not the reason those teams were weak, but just how much indelible impact did his actual basketball play have?

[Dr Positivity]

Votes

Bob Pettit
Paul Arizin
Dolph Schayes
Bill Sharman
Tommy Heinsohn
Clyde Lovellette
Frank Ramsey
Larry Foust
Joe Fulks

Some players I was on the fence about:

- Lovellette: I’m not sure I love the sequence of being a star added to the defending champion and then having them lose the next few years, but it has more to do with the Celtics than him I guess. The Hawks did have their best regular seasons with him so it’s believable they got better and just ran into a juggernaut. Interesting group of teams with him playing smaller roles with the Lakers and Celtics on the bookends.

- Ramsey: This one is really hard since he made no all-star teams. However his contributions to a few of their runs is undoubtably major. In 59 playoffs he had 30 pts/36 on TS that was +10 from the regular season average. Pretty impressive. He also led the playoffs in TS a few years earlier. It would feel inconsistent to put Heinsohn in and not him as neither would be HOFers on the wrong team.

- Foust: He gets the edge over someone like Sears due to his 2 finals. At his peak one of the most efficient players in the league so PER or WS for whatever they’re worth are favorable to him as a top 3-top 5 player.

- Fulks: I’m voting for him for the same reason I did last time. I think he’s a highly relevant player and his efficiency compared to the rest of his team in his prime wasn’t that bad considering how many shots he was taking, including leading his team in TS in 57, which is also the year they won. I think he’s more of a player that just got outdated quickly than someone who was especially overrated in his time Maravich style.

Open to adding a 10th player. Andy Phillip seems like an interesting candidate with 2x 2nd team All-NBA and leading the league in assists 3 times.

[Dutchball97]

Could we add the amount of votes to the spreadsheet? It's nice to see some context to the difference between locks and guys who barely made it in.

[70sFan]

I'm late at party, but can I still participate?