KillWill

into the mlb hall of fame, what is to be done with ac green? (especially considering some of the opinions around here regarding reggie miller.)

his carreer stats are not even really worth posting but . . .

* A member of the 2000 Laker championship team, starting in all six games of the Finals
* Played in his 1,000th consecutive game, posting 11 points (5-9 FG) and 6 rebounds, in a 91-74 win over the Vancouver Grizzlies on 3/13/99
* Scored a 1997-98 season-high 25 points and grabbed 11 rebounds against the Washington Wizards on 2/28/98
* Played in his 907th consecutive game, breaking Randy Smith's all-time NBA record, against the Golden State Warriors on 11/20/97
* Closed the 1997-98 season having played in 978 consecutive games and has missed only three games in his 13-season NBA career
* Was one of only three players (with Michael Finley and Aaron McKie) in 1996-97 to play in 83 games
* Scored his 10,000th career point against the Toronto Raptors on 11/23/96
* Appeared in the 1990 NBA All-Star Game, starting at power forward for the Western Conference
* Named to the 1988-89 NBA All-Defensive Second Team
* A member of the L.A. Lakers' 1987 and 1988 back-to-back championship teams and has made four NBA Finals appearances, all with the Lakers
* Has appeared in 150 career NBA Playoff games and started in 109 of them, averaging 8.7 ppg and 7.2 rpg
* In 1985-86, became the first Laker rookie since LeRoy Ellis in 1962-63 to appear in every game


not hof accomplishments by any means, but what about the iron man record? what is its value overall in regards to nba history etc?

__________________
"Some people, they play the piano. And some people, they move the piano."

-O. Schmidt

Diophantos

I don't really see it. I think consistency and longevity are important in evaluating player's careers (to a point) but for the HOF, it has to be sustained excellence over a long period of time, not sustained above-averageness, which is really what Green has. He was a solid role player on some great teams, and he basically never missed games. That does not make a HOF career to me.

__________________
A man said to the universe:
"Sir I exist!"
"However," replied the universe,
"The fact has not created in me
A sense of obligation."

- Stephen Crane

KillWill

when you say solid roleplayer for great teams i can't help but think of "big shot rob."

__________________
"Some people, they play the piano. And some people, they move the piano."

-O. Schmidt

kflo

of course, ripken won 2 league mvp awards and was a 19 time all-star. ac green?

KillWill

true, again my question is a curiosity considering the similarities in consec games records. i know there are many out there that still argue ripken is overated (an argument for a diff forum, sorry guys), i am not one of them, however.
what other "mediocre" players have HOF-type records though? can you guys think of some other exceptional cases if not intriguing ones? should there be an honorable mention wing?

also, it's not the hall of excellence it's the hall of FAME. a dubious moniker to say the least.

in any event, thanks for the input.

__________________
"Some people, they play the piano. And some people, they move the piano."

-O. Schmidt

Mike Goodman

I can name about 120 players who should go into the HOF before AC. By the time they all got in, there would be a bunch more. So no, he can't go.

Just getting into a game does not by itself contribute anything. If all you're doing is breaking your own consecutive streak, you could be doing a disservice.

Pioneer10

Career numbers serve a purpose in terming the overall value of a player but more important IMO is how they performed at there peak during an average career's lifespan. I'd say most decent players have about 10 good years in them. If a player wasn't considered a top 3-4 player over a majority of a decade hard for me to make a strong case for the HOF no matter how many years or game played

__________________

Diophantos

And if it's up to me, Horry doesn't make it into the hall.

And I wouldn't put too much emphasis on the "Hall of FAME" wording vs. "Hall of Excellence" or some such thing. In my mind, (with some notable exceptions) the HOF is for recognizing basketball excellence and accomplishment, not "fame", which is a different thing entirely.

__________________
A man said to the universe:
"Sir I exist!"
"However," replied the universe,
"The fact has not created in me
A sense of obligation."

- Stephen Crane

Mike Goodman

If the Hall isn't about Fame, why are so many Knicks (everyone on their '70-73 teams), Celtics (KCJones?), and Lakers (Goodrich?) in? -- While greater players whose careers were not on the coasts are out (Gilmore, McGinnis).

Gilmore's NBA career alone -- without his dominant 5 ABA seasons -- matches favorably against Willis Reed's. But Artis didn't come out of a tunnel in MSG, so . . .

Pete Maravich, Earl Monroe, David Thompson were flashy players, so they get in. Fame got them in, not accomplishments. Did James Worthy have a better career than Terry Cummings? Or just a higher profile?

Pioneer10

There is an inherent conflict btw aficionados of what to expect out of a HOF and what the HOF itself wants. Particularly since there is no set critiria and of all major sports basketball has one of the most obsucred selection problems (we don't even get vote totals I believe and for that matter the quality of the voter). Sort of similar to bowl games and Notre Dame. Clearly Notre Dame doesn't belong compared to other teams in certain bowls but they'll get in for non-football factors (i.e. draw, money, etc.)

__________________

kflo