I wouldn't argue that Shawn Kemp is a Hall of Famer, but the year that they went to the Finals, I would argue he was the best powerforward in the league. And the Bulls never really had an answer for him in that series.
i feel like the number of people in the hall would be really small according to your list. For example, i think that not many guys would be in the Hall that have played in the last 20 years according to your requirements. what are you going to do when your playing at a time when only a handful of players like jordan, hakeem, magic, dr. j, and bird ruled?
Here's my list of guys I think should definately be in the HOF (who aren't already in it), who played in the last 20 years. Reggie Miller John Stockton Charles Barkley Karl Malone Scottie Pippen Michael Jordan Gary Payton David Robinson Hakeem Olajuwon Tim Duncan Shaquille O'Neal Kobe Bryant Jason Kidd Allen Iverson Adrian Dantley Dominique Wilkins Patrick Ewing Bill Laimbeer Sidney Moncrief Mark Price Arvydas Sabonis Oscar Schmidt Toni Kukoc That's a pretty extensive list, and it's only from the last 20 years. With the exception of Sabonis and Schmidt every one of those guys was either an All-NBA First Teamer, or made it to the Finals. I would induct Sabonis and Schmidt (and Kukoc) because they were such great intl. players. Ask any Euro player in the NBA, and they'll likely tell you that one of those guys was a huge influence for them growing up. Guys I would consider are Kemp, Mark Agguire, Joe Dumars, Tim Hardaway, Chris Mullin, Mitch Richmond, Chris Webber, etc., etc...
I know Jason Kidd has been the best PG since Stockton left... but I cringe at him in the HOF for some reason
The problem is that you previously said that in order to make the HOF, you had to be the best player at your position AND make it to the Finals. Now, you're altering that to be making the All-NBA first team OR reach the Finals. That's a huge difference. The list you just posted doesn't come close to the HOF criteria that you previously stated. Interesting that you list Reggie Miller, but not Drexler. Reggie made all-nba 3rd team 3 times and went to one NBA finals without winning a title. Drexler on the other hand, was all-nba 1st team once, 2nd team once and third team 3 times. Drexler also went to three finals and won one title.
Nate Thurmond played in the 1966-67 Finals against Wilt Chamberlain's Philadelphia 76ers. 76er's won the series 4-2
Fair enough. However, the only guys (aside from the last three) on that list that weren't at some point in their respective careers the best player at their position or never made it to the Finals are Moncrief and Price. I made the exception for Moncrief because I think he was the greatest perimeter defender ever, and there was a short stretch in which you might argue he was the best 2 guard in the league. As for Price, I would put him in the HOF just because he's the man. He's one of my all-time favorite players, right up there with Brent. Drexler just got voted into the HOF, otherwise I would have included him.
I saw a lot of Shawn Kemp during his best seasons. He made a mark, no question, but he seldom controlled the game. To me he was always a part of a great collection of players in Seattle, not the guy the other coaches said, "Stop Kemp and you stop the Sonics." Kemp got the bulk of his points on stickbacks and in transition. He wasn't a masterful post player, like McHale, Olajuwon, or Duncan. He didn't even reach the level of Karl Malone and Barkley, whose post play was above average to be sure, but not exemplary. Kemp was not a very good passer either. Basically, he lived off of his legs and a pretty good jump shot. That's not Hall of Fame material. But a good career, for sure.
I'm kind of surprised these guys are not in...also Bernard King, World B. Free, etc. Seems like the standards are higher in the basketball HOF than in the other sports. Like someone said, if you don't go to the finals and/or dominate your position for at least one or two years, forget it.... So Kemp? No way...
Miller, Dantley and Laimbeer were never the best players at their position. I don't believe that Wilkins, Moncrief or Price ever played in a Finals. So, that means that just over 25% of your list don't meet you own criteria of being the best at their postion AND playing in a finals. When you define a criteria where George Gervin doesn't qualify for the HOF, then I think that your criteria is too strict.
Miller, Dantley, and Laimbeer all have been to the Finals (Laimbeer obviously has two rings). I don't think we're quite on the same page. Here's what I wrote: I understand that I worded that clumsily. What I meant was that it was an either/or type situation. If you're a major contributor to a team that makes the Finals, you're likely a very good player, even if your stats don't necessarily reflect that because of the level of talent on your team (A good example is Bobby Jones, who was just inducted). On the other hand, you could be a great, great player who never had the talent around you to make the Finals ('Nique being a prime example). So that's just a roundabout way of me saying that if you're a great player and get to the Finals, you merit consideration for the HOF, and likewise if your an great player that doesn't make the Finals, but still dominate your position, you should also get consideration. Gervin should certainly be in the HOF; he was a dominant scorer and 5 time All-NBA First Teamer. That said, we kicked his butt whenever we met him in the playoffs
That would exclude guys like Drexler (always inferior to Jordan in their primes), Robinson (inferior to Hakeem than Shaq) and even John Stockton (inferior at any one time to either Magic, Isiah or Payton. As for Kemp, no HoF. The dude was a monster in his brief prime, just a shade under two of the elite PFs ever to play in Barkley and Malone as a force on the court. But his emergence was too brief and not so spectacular (say unlike Bill Walton, whose rise was brief but who still delivered a title and was arguably the best player that year) to deserve HoF status.
Kemp should not even been considered for the HOF. He was never the best player at his position or in the least, one of the top players in the league for any extended amount of time. Before the Finals, he was just a great dunker and little else and he had a marvelous Finals against the Bulls. But after that, his career spiraled downward quicker than a Big Mac down his gullet. Mourning, although his case was sad, is not a HOFer either. He didn't win a championship and wasn't the top player at his position.....ever. Richmond, Tim Hardaway, ditto. None of those guys were great, but merely very good. And there is a difference.
While I agree those you mention are not HoFs, I don't think you can lock yourself into this argument. Drexler, Stockton or David Robinson were never really the best at their positions at any one time either (even if they did make the 1st team NBA everyone knew there were better players at their positons). Im short, you have to look at the total individual and team accomplishments. You don't penalize a guy for the HoF just because in their prime there were Jordan, Hakeem and Magic's lurking at their position who were just better.
Good point. Along those lines, those guys did accomplish something team-wise, but what did Kemp ever do besides blow up to 300 pounds and take the Cavaliers and Blazers down with him? But I think this is a fascinating discussion. I think you hit upon a good question: what constitutes a HOFer? Is it like porno, you know it when you see it? Or can we establish a criteria?
