Categories
Sports

How does the basketball Hall of Fame determine who gets in?

So far here seems to be the order of selection criteria:

  1. Regular season MVP – so far every player who has won MVP either in NBA or ABA has been elected to the Hall of Fame. We’ll see if Derrick Rose becomes the first player not to get in.
  2. Scoring leader – Yes this is actually a pretty important criteria! Because every scoring leader so far has been elected to the HoF!
  3. Finals MVP – almost every Finals MVP except Cedric Maxwell (and perhaps Andre Iguodala in the future) has been elected to the HoF.
  4. All-NBA 1st team selection 3 times or more – with the election of Paul Westphal last year, every player with 3x All-NBA 1st team or more have been selected to the HoF. There are some players with 3x All-ABA 1st team that haven’t been selected however, like Mack Calvin, but this is because the NBA does not value ABA awards at the same level.
  5. A Championship as the 1st or 2nd best player on the team – Since Jack Sikma’s induction last year (2nd best player on 1979 Sonics), almost every player who has won a ring as the best or second best player on their team has been elected to the Hall of Fame. The only notable exceptions are the 2004 Pistons, which still have not had any members (!) inducted in the HoF. Chauncey Billups and Ben Wallace will get in sometime I presume.
  6. Scoring 20,000 career pts – The only 2 players not in the HoF and have this criteria are Tom Chambers and Antawn Jamison.
  7. All-NBA 2nd team selection 3 times or more – this is not as guaranteed but *most* players with 3x All-NBA 2nd team or more have been selected to the HoF. notable exceptions are Shawn Kemp, Chris Webber, Kevin Johnson and Tim Hardaway, but I have a feeling they might get in sometime in the future.
  8. All-Star selection of 6 times or more – Again just like the above, *most* players with 6x All Star have been selected to the HoF. Notable exceptions are Walter Davis, Shawn Kemp, and Lou Hudson, but these are all very borderline HoFers.
Categories
Sports

Who would you say was the greatest NBA players of each decade for the past 40 years?

1950s:

Bob Pettit – George Mikan, Bob Cousy runner ups

Yeah I’m going with Pettit over Mikan and Cousy. The reasoning being: Mikan had no competition for his time and it was pre shot clock, pre goaltending era, he was playing in a baby version of the NBA basically. Cousy was a great player but he was overshadowed by his teammate Bill Russell.

Pettit – one of the most underrated players of all time – I feel that he is the best player of the 50s, he won 2 MVPs in the decade and was the only player to beat Russell’s Celtics in the Finals. He also would have *dominated* Mikan if he was playing at the same time. And was an alpha dog on the team unlike Cousy. He never averaged below 20 pts a game and he holds the third highest rebounding average all time. It’s definitely him.

1960s:

Bill Russell – Wilt Chamberlain, Jerry West runner ups

The only other choice is Wilt Chamberlain here. Now I love Wilt but if I’m looking at the achievements only by this decade, Russell has to take it. He won every single ring of the decade except for one year. He led the league in defensive win shares almost every single year. You might say that Russell had a better team than Wilt most of the time – which was true – but Russell had intangibles that Wilt didn’t have. Wilt had all the tangibles – all the stats, athleticism etc – but there is the fact that Russell is 10–0 in Game 7s. It’s not like his team was that dominant that he demolished Wilt or West’s teams every year, there were many many times where Russell’s Celtics came close to elimination – and Russell pulled through almost every time – he was 17–2 in elimination games. Russell was the Jordan of centers. He had that killer instinct that no one else had. He was the leader of the most dominant dynasty in all of pro sports. I have to put him here.

1970s:

Kareem Abdul-Jabbar – Julius Erving, Artis Gilmore runner ups

Kareem won 5 MVPs, 1 Ring, 1 Finals MVP in the decade and starred in Game of Death with Bruce Lee. How can you beat that resume? Really the 70s is generally the hardest decade to rank because of how divided the league was and how much parity it had. There was no clear superstar of the decade like there was for the 80s and 90s. That said – although Kareem had a tendency to get outrebounded and outworked on the glass by guys like Dave Cowens and Moses Malone and Bill Walton and old Wilt Chamberlain – he still outscored them all and was still a stellar defensive player no less. I’m taking Kareem.

1980s:

Magic Johnson – Larry Bird, Moses Malone runner ups

I’m taking Magic over Bird. He had 8 Finals appearances in the decade – that’s literally every year except for 1981 and 1986 – and won 5 of them. He beat Bird’s Celtics 2–1 in the Finals that decade. He also has 1 more Finals MVP than Bird. So yeah I’m going with probably my favorite player of all time – Magic.

1990s

Michael Jordan – Hakeem Olajuwon, Karl Malone runner ups

Do I really need to explain this one? 6 Finals, 6 rings, 6 Finals MVPs during this decade. Nuff said.

2000s:

Kobe Bryant – Tim Duncan, Shaq runner ups

Really Tong? I thought you hated Kobe, so why is he on here instead of Duncan? Let me explain. Yes I do think Kobe is overrated by the vast majority of fans but we’re talking about just the 2000s decade alone? Duncan’s dominance was spread out through 3 decades – which is incredible – while Kobe’s dominance was mostly focused in the 2000s. That’s the basic reason why I am picking Kobe here. If this was about who was the all time greater player – I’m taking Duncan – but here we’re talking strictly about the 2000s then I’m taking Kobe by a slim margin. Duncan was 3–0 in the Finals in the 2000s, had 2 MVPs and 2 Finals MVPs, but Kobe was 4–2 in the Finals in the 2000s, had 1 MVP and 1 Finals MVP. He had more Finals appearances and rings than Duncan, but less MVPs and Finals MVPs. It’s a very tough decision, but I gotta go with Kobe because having twice as many Finals appearances as Duncan in the same decade is not something to throw away – I value Finals appearances whether they end up winning or losing, which I will take into account for my next player here.

2010s:

Lebron James – Kevin Durant, Steph Curry runner ups

What else can I say here, this guy went to every single Finals of the decade except for 2010 and 2019. Unlike Magic, he did this with 2 different teams which is actually more impressive since usually it takes time to gel and build chemistry with a team, but Lebron is just amazing, he takes two completely different rosters and takes them to the Finals every single year. I don’t think there’s any other reasonable pick for this decade. I like Durant and Curry but they aren’t Lebron James.

Categories
Sports

Why do so many casual NBA fans discredit Wilt Chamberlain because he played in a “weak” era?

Honestly, I think it’s part ignorance and part denial.

First of all, since Wilt played in the 1960s and he’s no longer around to defend himself, and most of the people who watched him play are getting too old themselves, it’s very easy for the typical Gen Z / Millenial fan to point out that:

  1. Wilt played in an 8 team league
  2. Wilt’s numbers are inflated
  3. Wilt played against short white plumbers
  4. Bill Russell dominated him
  5. Shaq or whoever else would have owned that era

And all of these have a counterargument:

  1. An 8 team league would actually be more competitive, not less since more talent is concentrated in fewer teams
  2. Wilt’s numbers are not duplicated by anyone else of his era
  3. You can do some research and see that Wilt played against a guy 6′9 or taller at his position on every team, and that the average height back then was only 1″ shorter
  4. Bill Russell had a better team than Wilt did most of the time
  5. Time travel shenanigans don’t make any sense; today’s athletes benefit from the athletes that came before them. Barry Bonds would probably dominate in Babe Ruth’s era. Mike Tyson would have dominated in Muhammed Ali’s era. Wayne Gretzky would have dominated in Gordie Howe’s era. Any person with a college education today would have dominated Isaac Newton’s era. It doesn’t make any sense, and only for basketball do we discredit the older greats.

So I think it’s just ignorance for that part.

For the second part, I think it’s also denial. People see Wilt’s numbers and roll their eyes. They ignore it because Wilt’s numbers are too insane. They are video game numbers. How could someone have actually put up those numbers? That can’t be. That means that Wilt would be numbers-wise better than any other player in NBA history by a wide margin including Michael Jordan and Lebron James. The greatest of all time can’t be a guy that played 50 years ago. That’s impossible and not fun to think about. No, the greatest of all time has to be someone who played relatively recently so we can see all his footage and debate with other people who have seen him play. Wilt probably just got his numbers because everyone else sucked back then.

And thus, that’s why Wilt Chamberlain will always be IMO underrated because he was TOO dominant for his era to the point of it being too unbelievable. ESPN even left him out of their top 5 list. It’s really sad.