Professional and College Basketball Forums banner
1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,177 Posts
This was brought up on the NBA history board too. The only thing I can think of is whoever is voting is combining his accomplishments as a player and a GM. As a basketball player he was a good player but never a superstar. Maybe Jordan calling him the toughest defender he went up against is enough to consider him great.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,426 Posts
And he won two championships, won a Finals MVP, was selected to three all-nba teams (once to the 2nd team), and was selected to the all-star team six times.

There are lots of players in the Hall with fewer credentials.

Reggie Miller
0 championships
5 all-star selections
3 time all-nba THIRD team selections
0 all-defensive selections

People talk about Reggie as first ballot material. What did he have besides good cumulative stats? Dumars often sacrificed his stats and did the little things. What value did Reggie have on the court besides his shooting ability?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,275 Posts
Rashidi said:
And he won two championships, won a Finals MVP, was selected to three all-nba teams (once to the 2nd team), and was selected to the all-star team six times.

There are lots of players in the Hall with fewer credentials.

Reggie Miller
0 championships
5 all-star selections
3 time all-nba THIRD team selections
0 all-defensive selections

People talk about Reggie as first ballot material. What did he have besides good cumulative stats? Dumars often sacrificed his stats and did the little things. What value did Reggie have on the court besides his shooting ability?
Clutchness.... few ppl have had the clutch ability of reggie
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,275 Posts
Rashidi said:
And Dumars wasn't clutch himself?

Robert Horry is clutch too. That doesn't make him a first ballot hall of famer.
I never said that Dumars wasn't. And Robert Horry isn't hall of fame material because he was never a goto guy. Reggie will always be remembered for his clutchness, but also because he was Indiana's goto guy for 15ish years.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,470 Posts
TripleDouble said:
He's a career 16 ppg, 4.5 ast and 2.2 reb player. He never won DPOY and only made the NBA defensive 1st team 4 times. What did he do that was HOF worthy?
Only?? Tyson Chandler is Dennis Rodman or Ben Wallace to some people and he hasn't even made a second team yet. The other day, someone called Luc Longley a "great defensive center."

Dumars was probably the defender to give Michael Jordan the most trouble early in his career.

Why do people obsess over numbers so much? This "his number's are only this" ignores the fact that he played with AT LEAST two other hall of famers, and maybe 3 if you figured Adrian Dantley MIGHT get consideration. That team really spread things around and had a lot of very good players. It wasn't Kobe and a bunch of dudes. He played with freakin Isiah Thomas, Adrian Dantley, Bill Laimbeer (who could score) and other players like Mark Agguire, Vinny Johnson and John Salley who could put the ball in the hole pretty well on a given possession.

Put Dumars in Iverson's shoes with 11 role players for most of his career and he'd easily have averaged 22 PPG or higher! Looking at stats is OK, if you don't completely ignore that behind those stats are completely different situations.

Take Danny Ainge v. Ben Gordon. Someone ridiculed the comparison because "look at Ainge's numbers." I'm firmly convinced that to make this argument, that person COMPLETELY IGNORED that Ainge spent his early years with 4 and sometimes FIVE hall of famers. Bird, McHale, Parrish, Dennis Johnson and Bill Walton.

Comparing stats from the 80s, when teams were stacked, to now, is ridiculous to me, unless the guy from the 80s actually has BETTER stats than a guy today, all while playing alongside better players.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,470 Posts
Brian said:
This was brought up on the NBA history board too. The only thing I can think of is whoever is voting is combining his accomplishments as a player and a GM. As a basketball player he was a good player but never a superstar. Maybe Jordan calling him the toughest defender he went up against is enough to consider him great.
I don't think that you need to be a superstar to make the hall. Dumars was the second best player on a team that won more than 1 championship. Hasn't that usually meant a trip to the hall of fame in and of itself? On the Celtics of the 60s Cousy and Havlicek played this role, both in the hall now. Frazier did it for the Knicks, check. Cowens on the 74 and 76 Celtics. McHale on the Celtics of the 80s. Kareem/Magic (take your pick, varied by which part of the 80s you're talking about) on LA. Dumars, Scottie, Drexler (94 may be the first example, since it was pretty much Hakeem and 11 role players, which, IMO, only speaks to Hakeem's greatness even more), Kobe, and then for SA it is tough. I don't see Parker making it, Ginobili MIGHT if he continues to raise his levle of play, but who was second best out of Duncan/Robinson in 99?
 

·
Welcome to the Grindhouse!
Joined
·
19,781 Posts
nanokooshball said:
Clutchness.... few ppl have had the clutch ability of reggie
Reggie Miller's clutchness is more myth than reality. It was born from hitting big shots vs. mediocre New York Knick teams. The NY media blew him up because of it. I don't recall his clutch shots vs. MJ and the Bulls in big games. Heck, he only made the finals once if I am correct.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,470 Posts
MemphisX said:
Reggie Miller's clutchness is more myth than reality. It was born from hitting big shots vs. mediocre New York Knick teams. The NY media blew him up because of it. I don't recall his clutch shots vs. MJ and the Bulls in big games. Heck, he only made the finals once if I am correct.
He did hit one against us in 1998 to win a playoff game, but there was this thing called "the other end of the court," which IMO, is a reason to keep Reggie out if Dumars were to not make it
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,379 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
Pippenatorade said:
Only?? Tyson Chandler is Dennis Rodman or Ben Wallace to some people and he hasn't even made a second team yet. The other day, someone called Luc Longley a "great defensive center."

Dumars was probably the defender to give Michael Jordan the most trouble early in his career.

Why do people obsess over numbers so much? This "his number's are only this" ignores the fact that he played with AT LEAST two other hall of famers, and maybe 3 if you figured Adrian Dantley MIGHT get consideration. That team really spread things around and had a lot of very good players. It wasn't Kobe and a bunch of dudes. He played with freakin Isiah Thomas, Adrian Dantley, Bill Laimbeer (who could score) and other players like Mark Agguire, Vinny Johnson and John Salley who could put the ball in the hole pretty well on a given possession.

Put Dumars in Iverson's shoes with 11 role players for most of his career and he'd easily have averaged 22 PPG or higher! Looking at stats is OK, if you don't completely ignore that behind those stats are completely different situations.

Take Danny Ainge v. Ben Gordon. Someone ridiculed the comparison because "look at Ainge's numbers." I'm firmly convinced that to make this argument, that person COMPLETELY IGNORED that Ainge spent his early years with 4 and sometimes FIVE hall of famers. Bird, McHale, Parrish, Dennis Johnson and Bill Walton.

Comparing stats from the 80s, when teams were stacked, to now, is ridiculous to me, unless the guy from the 80s actually has BETTER stats than a guy today, all while playing alongside better players.
Is your arguement that players who play with hall of famers should be favored for hall of fame entrance?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,470 Posts
TripleDouble said:
Is your arguement that players who play with hall of famers should be favored for hall of fame entrance?
My argument was written right there. What's not to get. We've seen in this thread that he's a 6 time all-star, a 4 time defensive first team selection, and a 3 time All-NBA first team player. Oh, and he was the second best player on a two time NBA Champion. And the counter-argument to that very impressive resume is: "well look at his numbers." When he played with a hall of famer who is probably a top 20-25 player, forget about 50, another hall of famer in Dennis Rodman, and a guy who is borderline in Adrian Dantley. And then you look at guys like "AI" and "TMac" (who has spent most of his career without a hall of famer on his roster) and you imagine what Dumars numbers would have been if it was him and 11 guys. For crying out loud, to make it work with Iverson they had to bring in how many guys who just played D and took wide open shots... Snow, Lynch, McKie, Motumbo. Can you imagine what Dumars would have put up if those four were around him?

So no, I think that that is a gross oversimplification of my argument. My argument is not "if a guy plays with hall of famers, then it is more likely, ceteris parabus, that he is a hall of famer." My argument is that, if a guy has a resume as impressive as Dumars, and the knock is "well look at the lack of impressive numbers," and then you see more hall of famers on the team, you have to factor that in.

Just tell me that you could take Thomas off of those Pistons teams, make the makeup more like some of Iverson's teams, and Dumars would only have averaged those numbers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,379 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
Pippenatorade said:
My argument was written right there. What's not to get. We've seen in this thread that he's a 6 time all-star, a 4 time defensive first team selection, and a 3 time All-NBA first team player. Oh, and he was the second best player on a two time NBA Champion. And the counter-argument to that very impressive resume is: "well look at his numbers." When he played with a hall of famer who is probably a top 20-25 player, forget about 50, another hall of famer in Dennis Rodman, and a guy who is borderline in Adrian Dantley. And then you look at guys like "AI" and "TMac" (who has spent most of his career without a hall of famer on his roster) and you imagine what Dumars numbers would have been if it was him and 11 guys. For crying out loud, to make it work with Iverson they had to bring in how many guys who just played D and took wide open shots... Snow, Lynch, McKie, Motumbo. Can you imagine what Dumars would have put up if those four were around him?

So no, I think that that is a gross oversimplification of my argument. My argument is not "if a guy plays with hall of famers, then it is more likely, ceteris parabus, that he is a hall of famer." My argument is that, if a guy has a resume as impressive as Dumars, and the knock is "well look at the lack of impressive numbers," and then you see more hall of famers on the team, you have to factor that in.

Just tell me that you could take Thomas off of those Pistons teams, make the makeup more like some of Iverson's teams, and Dumars would only have averaged those numbers.
I don't remember Dumars as being an incredibly explosive one-on-one player so I'm not sure he could have averaged great scoring numbers. It was a while ago though. Plus his rebounding was downright bad for a 2 guard.

Great players, great teams and perfect situations make some players better than they would have otherwise been. I think this arguement is just as valid as your arguement that Dumars would have been great on another team and therefore I don't think Dumars should be given the benifit of the doubt as far as his career production being less than HOF worthy.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,470 Posts
TripleDouble said:
I don't remember Dumars as being an incredibly explosive one-on-one player so I'm not sure he could have averaged great scoring numbers. It was a while ago though. Plus his rebounding was downright bad for a 2 guard.

Great players, great teams and perfect situations make some players better than they would have otherwise been. I think this arguement is just as valid as your arguement that Dumars would have been great on another team and therefore I don't think Dumars should be given the benifit of the doubt as far as his career production being less than HOF worthy.
I don't think so at all. First of all, Dumars could flat fill it up offensively. He averaged 27 PPG against the friggin Lakers in the Finals when he won NBA Finals MVP. So I guess you could say "(In my opinion) He wasn't explosive," but, in my opinion he was. He shot 46% at 6'3" for his entire career despite playing well into his late 30s. Also, if you look at his scoring numbers, they rise as Isiah Thomas' prime ends and then decrease as Grant Hill took over in Detroit. When Dumars 20.4 in 91, 19.9 in 92, 23.5 in 93 and 20.4 in 94, he showed what you probably would have seen without Thomas. When he comes out and averages 23.5 PPG after the Pistons has been broken up and Isiah was old and almost a non-factor, I think that that kinda lets you know his ability. In fact, I think 93 was the year Isiah got elbowed by Malone and missed most of the year.

Players who go to 6 All-Star games, make 3 NBA first teams, 4 NBA All-Defensive First teams (how many players all time even have that many?) win a Finals MVP while averaging 27 PPG against a very very good LA team and are the second best player on a two-time NBA Champion are 1) usually hall of famers, and 2) are usually not the kind of players who are the ones being made better. Dumars had more jib than anyone on that team and was MAKING people better.

And as far as rebounding numbers? From a 6'3" guard they're about as relevant to me as FT shooting or assists from a center.

Dumars also ended the 1997-98 season ranked 2nd in Pistons history with 15,973 points, 4,478 assists and 879 steals. This is on a franchise that has had not only Isiah Thomas but Dave Bing, a top 50 player who was also a guard and played a decade for Detroit.

Bottom line Dumars is a hall of famer, I'd take him over Iverson any day of the week, he made others better not the other way around, AND the Jordan Rules defense doesn't even come CLOSE to working without JD's man defense on MJ.

Two side things impressed me most about Dumars. Little novelties. One, when the rest of the Pistons chumped out and left the court early so as not to shake the Bulls hands, Dumars was there to shake. Second, in that same series, we tried to post Horace Grant up on Dumars and Horace had trouble squaring himself to even receive the inlet.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,426 Posts
I don't remember Dumars as being an incredibly explosive one-on-one player so I'm not sure he could have averaged great scoring numbers. It was a while ago though. Plus his rebounding was downright bad for a 2 guard.
Gee, rebounding as a reason to keep a guard out.

*Coughs in Reggie's general direction*
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,244 Posts
Another thing to keep in mind when looking at Dumar's accomplishments is consider who he was competing against at his position for All NBA Team, All Defensive Team, etc. That #23 guy playing for Chicago wasn't too shabby and probably kept Joe D off a few of these teams. I agree with most of Pippenatorade's points in this thread and feel he (Joe, not Pippenatorade) should be in the HOF.
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top