JoJo White should he in the Hall

Thanks everyone for contributing to a lively discussion. Something to keep things interesting while we wait for training camp and the start of the season.

Regarding stats, I'd refine what's been said here. I wouldn't say that stats don't mean much -- they do mean something. But they aren't the only criteria by which to judge the quality of a player or (as in this thread) whether he deserves to be in the hall of fame.

The sad truth is that if you have a player who excels primarily at one aspect of the game -- offense or defense -- a player who excels at offense is far more likely to be an all-star or in the hall of fame. Part of that is the glorification of offense by casual fans and media, and part is that there are far more stats available for offense. Anyone knowledgeable about the sport understands that you need to be good at both ends of the court to be successful, but casual fans (reinforced by the media) think that someone who can score but is a lousy defender like Monta Ellis or Kevin Martin is a much better player than someone like, say, Shane Battier or Thabo Sefolosha, who is a defensive specialist. Heck, I've had both Monta Ellis and Kevin Martin on my fantasy team, but I'd rather have Battier or Sefolosha on my real team.

Anyway, here's my take on Spike's list of defensive specialists who should be in the hall of fame. One thing though -- two of the guys on your list (Nate Thurmond and Walt Frazier) are already in the hall of fame. (Nate is my favorite all-time player and is the guy on the right in my avatar.) A third (Gary Payton) should be voted into the HOF after he becomes eligible in 2012.

Dennis Rodman -- should be in the HOF. Listed on basketball-reference.com as 6-7, yet led the league in rebounding seven straight years. Each year during that span, he averaged more rebounds per game (18.7, 18.3, 17.3, 16.8, 14.9, 16.1, 15.0) than Dwight Howard has averaged during his best season (14.2).

Satch Sanders -- since I was too young at the time and he didn't play for my local team, I was aware of other Celtics but not him. I'll trust others who saw him play to make the call.

Gary Payton -- will be in the HOF when he becomes eligible in 2012. Has good offensive stats to go with his defensive ability, so I wouldn't classify him as a defensive specialist.

Micheal Cooper -- I have mixed feelings about whether he should be in the hall of fame. I really liked him as a player (and not that it matters, met him once), but if push comes to shove, I'd say no.

Artis Gilmore -- it's a travesty that he's not in the HOF. Like Payton, he was a good defender but not a defensive specialist -- he averaged 18.8 points a game over his career.

Bill Laimbeer -- I'd refuse to put him in the HOF because was such a dirty player. He was a dirty player with very good skills, and the skills weren't good enough to offset his negatives. Those negatives count. I'm not sure I'd vote him in even if wasn't a dirty player. He was very good, not great.

Maurice Cheeks, Bobby Jones -- like Cooper, I have mixed feelings, respected them a lot... but no.

Arvydas Sabonis -- world basketball HOF, yes. NBA HOF, no. By the time he joined the NBA, he'd already ruptured (I think) both Achilles tendons and, although he was good, was not close to the player he was before his injuries.

Outside

Outside,

I agree with almost everything you listed.
I don't feel bad about defensive specialists not being considered for the NBA Hall of Fame. Football and Hockey have players that play defensive positions so they receive their due but the NBA is viewed like MLB where a player can't get in on defense alone. I won't reference Mark Belanger because he couldn't hit at all, but even a player like Graig Nettles who was a good offensive player and a great defensive player, he is not even close to a hall of famer.
Ben Wallace, Dikembe Mutumbo and Mark Eaton were all great defensive players but nowhere close to hall of famers.

Michael Cooper should not even be mentioned in a hall of fame discussion.
Gary Payton is a no doubt hall of famer. He finished 1st team defensive player 9 times, finished in the top 6 of the MVP voting 6 times and in the top 9 of MVP voting 8 times.
As a comparison, Paul Pierce has never finished in the top 6 in MVP voting. (7th one time).

Detals, details. The devil's in the details. Thanks for the assist, guys. Shoulda checked my facts better, couldn't understand why Nate and Clyde hadn't been voted in. Just to be clear, the other guys I listed are players I think should be in the Hall in a special wing for defensive players, in recognition of the role of defense in winning.

That aside, it seems we spontaneously generated an idea here for the Hall: enshrine some teams. Of course, it goes without saying that every Celtics team to win a championship belongs - but I guess this is one area where I'm prejudiced.

My nominees: The Seattle Supersonics, with DJ, Paul Silas, Jack Sikma, Fred Brown, and I know I'm forgetting someone really important to that team, but my biorhythms are running low right now.

The Chauncy Billups/Rasheed Wallace Pistons. I don't know what I liked about them but I liked it a lot. Maybe because they were overachievers and played so hard and never quit.

CF,

You certainly picked a great era for your introduction to pro basketball. The 80s definitely revitalized the popularity of the game.

I'm really hard on the use of basketball stats partly because I'm a professional statistician, who has had it drilled into me that stats without context are of questionable validity at best. It happens a lot with pro basketball.

And I believe that having been part of a given era helps one to consider appropriate contexts when discussing stats or anything else about that era. I would love to have seen baseball in the 20s and 30s to have a comparative context for that era, but I'd probably be at death's door now, so I view that as an acceptable tradeoff.

The whole cross-era thing is always a hornet's nest. The entire reason I originally joined Boston.com more than five years ago was as a sort of later day Johnny Appleseed concerning the Russell Celtics. I'm on a mission not to glorify them, because they don't need me to do that, but rather to try to dissuade people from rewriting their history for one reason or another. I've lived and loved all the eras, certainly including the present one. But that's the one that's most likely to be misunderstood simply because the passage of time. I'm determined that won't happen.

Man,am I eager for this season to start! Thanks for helping the time to pass with some interesting conversation.

Sam

P.S. If you really want to see me sound off sometime, wait until there's a discussion of Hollinger (Mr. Pop Stats in my opinion) and particularly the PER.

And to others concerning the wisdom of leaving defensive specialists off the HOF, I'm writing Bill Russell now and asking him to turn in his award.

Sam

It's not the NBA Hall of Fame!

IT"S the NAISMITH MEMORIAL BASKETBALL HALL OF FAME!!

There are many names in the HOF that have not stepped foot on an NBA court as a player.

http://www.hoophall.com/hall-of-famers-index/

check it out ! Contributions to the game are just as important in making it as any stat!

And one of my favorite players as a kid Meadowlark Lemon!! and he's in! So are many females (thats for you Rosalie!!)

beat

ricky d

We must have alot of the same tastes in things because I loved those 2 teams as well.I loved how they both played unselfish team ball and really could DEFEND.I always liked Lonnie Shelton when he was an up and coming young player with the Knicks,he and Dave Cowens had some good match ups against each other and when Silas ended up there had to root for them.Both teams didn't have that HoF superstar to carry them and bail them out,was great to see that Sonics team upset that great Blazer team and who was I rooting for that year vs LA?before that year I despised the Pistons,but found it easy to root for guys like Chauncey Billups,Ben Wallace and Sheed.It was a joy to watch that lockdown D.

cow

Beat,

Thanks for the information about the hall of fame. I've never been there (obviously). I somehow thought there were separate categories or wings (or something) for college and NBA, but it's organized by players, coaches, referees, teams, and contributors, with all levels intermixed, so that you have Morgan Wooten (high school), John Wooden (college-men), Sandra Kay Yow (college-women), and Lenny Wilkens (NBA) together simply under "coaches." The link provided a much-needed education. I like very much that it's about all of basketball.

So I happily change my previous post to say Ardvynas Sabonis belongs in the HOF.

Outside

Here is one for the memory banks from the HOF.

Remember if your old enough the 1972 Munich basketball disaster/travesty How the russians had 3 chances with 3 seconds left, trailing by a point. The third time this guy knocked aside both US players and scored the winning hoop! He's in the HOF!
http://www.hoophall.com/hall-of-famers/tag/sergei-a-belov

beat

And if you want to know a little sidelight the US has never accepted the silver medals from the olympiad as they were totally screwed by the officials on the court and the ones on the sidelines keeping the clock.

Doug Collins made to free throws to give the US the lead then the fiasco started.

here is the rundown of the rest of the game.

http://espn.go.com/classic/s/Classic_1972_usa_ussr_gold_medal_hoop.html

beat

Outside

one final thought, as my son rightfully said, NONE of the halls of fames for the major sports are limited to Major League baseball, NFL Football or NHL Hockey they are Halls of Fame for those particular sports on both the professional and amatuer level.

beat

Beat,

I remember that game quite well. Poor Henry Iba befuddled about what was going on, the mystery man repeatedly coming out of the stands to tell the referees and scorers' table what to do, all of it. Doug Collins not only made two clutch free throws, he made them after a particularly hard foul that left him woozy.

One correction though -- although Sergei Belov was on the 1972 Soviet team, it was Alexander Belov who made that last basket. Sergei is in the HOF, not Alexander.

Thanks for the note about all the halls of fame. Being on the West Coast, none of them are exactly nearby, and I haven't been to any of them.

OOPS

I always thought it was him!

I remember comming in the house after doing barn chores and asking my parents who won, as the game was in the early afternoon our time. My dad without hesitation said we did by one point. So I went on the rest of the evening thinking we won. Later I saw the news and then the replays and was shocked as was my dad when I told him. So many things happened in those Olympics. The murders, the cheating by the russian epee that signaled a hit when in fact he never touched any one. the US sprinters missing their 100 meter heat. Dave Wottle winning the 800 for the USA and then wearing that hat during the national anthum. Dumont getting in troubke for using a cold medication that was restricted but the US coaches had an outdated list. Frank Shorter winning the marathon but another runner entered the stadium in front of him as an imposter. Jim Ryun getting tripped and falling in his heat in the 1500. The boxing judges that Cosell would have killed if he had the chance.

Those are just a few that I can think of off the top of my head.

beat

Beat, off topic but two other things from those games (from me the boxing fan ) The only gold Medal won by the USA was won by the immortal "Sugar" Ray.....Seales!! And American Heavyweight favorite Duane Bobick was knocked out by a Cuban that he had defeated a year earlier in the Pan Am Games , some guy named Teofilo Stevenson. It was Stevenson's first of 3 straight Olympic Golds.

cow

It would be awesome if your namesake returns to the Cs to take over for Clifford Ray. Ray was great, Mr. Fundamentals, but Big Red could maybe impart some of that fire. "Now that's an effin FOUL!"

The sympatico on this board reminds me of one of the ancient Celtic Druids' beliefs: that in the physical world, opposites attract, but in the spiritual world, like attracts like.

The impact player on the '79 Supersonics championship team that I couldn't remember was Gus Williams. Tough one to forget, borderline Naismith Hall of Fame candidate, one could argue. That backcourt of DJ and Gus was one for the ages, with Lenny Wilkens coaching them up. The Washington team they beat wasn't that bad, either, but I can never forgive them for what they did to the Celtics, not even after all these years - ugghh.

Sam wrote:CF,

You certainly picked a great era for your introduction to pro basketball. The 80s definitely revitalized the popularity of the game.

I'm really hard on the use of basketball stats partly because I'm a professional statistician, who has had it drilled into me that stats without context are of questionable validity at best. It happens a lot with pro basketball.

And I believe that having been part of a given era helps one to consider appropriate contexts when discussing stats or anything else about that era. I would love to have seen baseball in the 20s and 30s to have a comparative context for that era, but I'd probably be at death's door now, so I view that as an acceptable tradeoff.

The whole cross-era thing is always a hornet's nest. The entire reason I originally joined Boston.com more than five years ago was as a sort of later day Johnny Appleseed concerning the Russell Celtics. I'm on a mission not to glorify them, because they don't need me to do that, but rather to try to dissuade people from rewriting their history for one reason or another. I've lived and loved all the eras, certainly including the present one. But that's the one that's most likely to be misunderstood simply because the passage of time. I'm determined that won't happen.

Man,am I eager for this season to start! Thanks for helping the time to pass with some interesting conversation.

Sam

P.S. If you really want to see me sound off sometime, wait until there's a discussion of Hollinger (Mr. Pop Stats in my opinion) and particularly the PER.

And to others concerning the wisdom of leaving defensive specialists off the HOF, I'm writing Bill Russell now and asking him to turn in his award.

Sam

great reply.

first the Bold, I agree about Hollinger and his somewhat desperate attempt to get 'his' created stat to become relevant by him pounding it's usage over and over again at ESPN (aka BSPN to many). While I don't believe it's a perfect stat, it's a stat to be used with others to help observe and back up your thoughts. I do tend to look at PER and TS% along with the regular traditional stats as well when comparing players. If at all possible looking up head to head matchups helps me a lot too.

Whenever I discuss players playing in different era's first thing I do is assume it's the modern era. So Bill Russell is a 4 yr vet right now. That means he's played AAU ball, college (probably 1 yr) and has had the improved knowledge about nutrition, exercise and medical treatment to benefit from. As well as private jets and 1st class accommodations.
It also means he's probably a little more selfish having played AAU ball, a little more egotistical and with the insane money a little less angry.
I think you have to take those things into consideration as well. I think Russell, Wilt, Oscar, West, Cousy, Frazier, Baylor would all excel regardless of the era but some others who did well in their era would be hurt. Derek Harper and the no handcheck rule for example

I heard by purists on this board that I trust that Baylor couldn't play any defense,which is one of the reasons many of the ballplayers back in that era themselves thought Havlicek was the better player.

CF,

That's good context stuff. Who knows what Bill Russell would have been like with 45 more pounds of muscle and without the advantage of four years in the minor leagues known as college to learn the fundamentals and do his personal studies of the geometry of basketball? An unbeatable monster, or a 270-pound muscle-bound dummy?

Of course, someone of my age reserves the right to assume the context is not the present but the past. Let today's players lose the advantages of genetics, charter plane travel, conditioning methods, etc., but give them the four years in college. Then let the two eras have at it against one another. I don't know why; but somehow, when it comes down to the pure ability to play Dr. Naismith's game, I'm feeling pretty good about the old guys prevailing more often than not.

We'll never know.

Sam

I think the guys who are driven will succeed regardless of era.

That's what I love about Karl Malone, he worked and worked and improved his game constantly to become, IMO the greatest PF of all time.

CF

I'd take McHale over malone in a heartbeat. No one could stop McHale in his prime.

beat

Just to add how much did Stockton make Malone look good? Mchale had no such "feeder" and had to play with other scorers (Bird and Parish) who else was a big scorer for Utah most of those years? But the low post was his and no one had as many moves as he.

Here's my issue with that.

Malone was just as unstoppable. In a different way but just as unstoppable.
The argument that McHale would score more on a less talented team is a precarious one. It would also mean he'd be the focus of the defense and a perfect example of going to a lesser team does not equal better stats/players is Devin Harris who went to the Nets and has struggled with the extra responsibility. I know his scoring has risen a lot in NJ but look at his FG and 3PT %'s, drastic dive in both.
McHale may have struggled without having such talent to lessen the burden and stop teams from doubling him constantly. I know he still go doubled but with Larry, Ainge and DJ ready to drop a jumper and make teams pay, they couldn't do it as aggressively.

And to say the McHale didn't have someone to feed him??? um hello Larry Bird, Dennis Johnson ring a bell.

Take off the green blinders, Malone also made Stockton's job a lot easier with his incredible speed for a big man which allowed him to rebound outlet and get down the court to recieve the pass for a layup.

Malone also added a very reliable outside shot to his game as he got older and played at an exceptional level for longer than any other player in the history of the game. His prime was longer than most players careers. That does have to count for something in the big scheme of things.

I'd love for you to find 10% of non-biased celtics fans who would prefer McHale over Malone. McHale is still a top 5 all time PF, but he's still not as good as Malone.

CF

Dont worry about the green blinder. Mchale over Malone is a no brainer to me IMHO

And Bird and Dj certainly assisted some to Mchale but no where near as much as Stockton did to malone while looking for there own shots too. Stockton could score but he was not there to do that as the first option.

Malone had no where near the moves McHale did, not even close.

Mchale played about 1/3 less games. I will give Malone the credit of being healthy for his entire career.

Field Goal, and Foul Shooting % both go to McHale easily. And with Malone playing about 1/3 more games.......McHale had 1693 turnovers to Malones 4524.

In his best years McHales stats compare quite favorably to Malone dispte playing with Bird and company when Malones teams had not near the overall talent.

If I needed one hoop to win a game and had to choose either Malone or McHale in the low block i'd want the ball in McHales hand 100% of the time.
You have your opinion I have mine. Thats what a good debate is all about.

And I really quesion the top 5 thing? If you have Malone 1 then who are the other ones before McHale?

beat

hmm it's not in stone but I'd go

1. Malone
2. Duncan
3/4 Barkley KG
5 McHale

I know Malone didn't have McHale's moves but he faced a ton of double teams and was just as effective finding ways to score with his speed and agressiveness. He was also the focal point of the Jazz offense and thus the focal point of defensive strategies by other teams and still have a 19 yr career average of 25ppg. That's pretty darn impressive.

McHale never averaged 10 rpg for a single season, dampened I know by having Bird and Parrish and having played 6th man for the early part of his career, but the fact of the matter is Malone averaged at least 10 rpg for more than half of his seasons and has a better rebounding percentage.

McHale's low post moves do not put him ahead of Malone in my books and there's no where else where he has an edge. Defensively Malone was not a shot blocker, but he was great at denying position and had quick hands to strip the ball away. McHale was the long armed guy you hated facing in pickup ball who could come from nowhere to swipe the ball away and had great postitional knowledge as well. I'd say they're a near tie defensively, but if I had to choose I'd give McHale the slight nod.

oh yeah I never did chime in to say that I agree that Jo Jo probably should be in the HOF.
I love that his number jump in the playoffs. Shows he was a gamer.

Of course I never had the chance to see him play and don't know his rep so I'll go by what others have said on here.

CF,

I doubt Jo Jo would ever get into the Hall based on his stats. But I claim stats are largely irrelevant when it comes to the Celtics' traditional style of play.

The Celtics system at the time called for consistency. He was a model of consistency. The system also called for guys who wanted to take the big shot. That was Jo Jo; and he was more deadly in the clutch than his 44% lifetime shooting percentage would indicate.

He had almost a classic jumper on which he's almost seem to jump a bit backward, with his feet out in front, while he hang in the air and drained it. He was basically a combo guard, playing whichever position buys like Havlicek, Charlie Scott, Paul Westphal, Don Chaney and Kevin Stacom weren't playing—averaged 5-6 assists during his Celtics career while playing both backcourt positions. Solid defender and a hell of a free throw shooter. Led by example rather than histrionics.

Because of how he fulfilled the unique needs of Celtics team basketball in helping to produce two championships, I'd say he could very well be considered for the Hall. By the statistical standards that are typically applied, I'd sort of doubt it.

Frankly, I'd vote for Satch Sanders first. He was the main reason that other teams' big men couldn't double-screen Russ and have a field day on offense. He always took the tough defensive guy. And he averaged in double figures and could have easily scored in the high teens on a team that needed him to shoot. And he was the most underrated tough guy (among the sharpest elbows) in the league. Soft-spoken but incredibly articulate, I'm sure it was he who uttered the comeback phrase when Auerbach gave them a short pep talk as they were heading out of the locker room to a game 7. Red said something like, "Win or lose, you're my boys." And a voice (had to be Satch) trailed out of the room. "Lose! Are you kiddin' me baby?"

By the way, I believe Satch is the only answer to the following trivia question: "What NBA player won a championship ring in each of his first six years in the league?" And he was no hanger-on in those championship years. Without him, the Celtics had absolutely no long-term answer to Elgin Baylor.

Sam

I thought you guys wouldn't mind reading what that other Sam had to say about all of this. It's from his interview on celtic-nation.com.

Sam Jones: "You couldn’t have a better situation than I did, playing with guys like that. They were all so special - KC Jones, Bob Cousy, Bill Sharman, Jim Loscutoff, Tom Heinsohn, and John Havlicek. It was unbelievable the way we played as a team, and I was really mad – yes, I’m going to put it that way, I was really mad when they started picking entire teams for inclusion into the Hall of Fame. When I was inducted, one of my statements was that team sports were not about the individual, that sometimes forgotten are the players who may not make it to the Hall of Fame – which is the case with some of the players that I played with during my career with the Boston Celtics. So the day that I was inducted I said that my [Hall of Fame] ring was in honor of those players that I participated with who may never find themselves standing at that podium in Springfield. I also said that it was my wish that we could go in as a team. At that time the Hall of Fame had never inducted a team – but just a few years ago the first team to be included was the Harlem Globetrotters. And then, in 2007, Texas Western was inducted. If you saw the movie Glory Road, you know that they won the 1966 NCAA National Championship and did so by becoming the first Division I school to start five African-American players. Not to take anything away from that, but I’ve always thought that we should have went into the Hall of Fame as a team. I went to eleven NBA Finals in my twelve years in the league, and we won ten championships. You’ll never see that again – that will never happen, unless God gets his own team [laughs].

"Scoring averages don’t mean a thing. Making the All-Star team, and being named All-NBA, those things don’t mean a thing either. Every guy on those Celtic teams had the ability to lead the team in scoring if that's what he was asked to do. But we all had a role to play. We all knew what was expected of us, and what each of us had to do in order to win the championship. It was the most unselfish group of people I’ve ever been associated with. It’s also why I didn’t want to be inducted into the hall of fame without my teammates. To me, what we did wasn’t about one person. It wasn't only about Bill Russell or Sam Jones. It was about the entire team, the roles we played, and the sacrifices that we made in order to achieve something bigger.”


It sounds so much like the things the other Sam was saying above. So, for you johnny-come-lately Celtics fans who jumped on the bus only a couple of decades ago, Sam Jones is the only other man in NBA history, besides Bill Russell, who has double-digit championship rings (10).

Bill Russell: “In the years that I played with the Celtics, in terms of total basketball skills, Sam Jones was the most skillful player that I ever played with. At one point, we won a total of eight consecutive NBA championships, and six times during that run we asked Sam to take the shot that meant the season. If he didn’t hit the shot we were finished – we were going home empty-handed. He never missed.”

How can McHale be viewed as a better player then Karl Malone?
Malone finished in the top 10 in MVP Voting 14 straight years.
McHale finished in the top 10 only 1 time and in the top 20 3 times.
Malone won 2 league MVP's.
Yes, Malone did average more turnovers then McHale but he more then doubled McHale in assists per game and more then tripled him in steals per game. McHale blocked about twice as many shots as Malone did per game.
In my opinion, McHale was a dominant player but below Karl Malone.