Is CWebb HOF worthy?
- Thread starter kupman
- Start date
kupman
Starter
That's just the tricky thing about the HOF now, isn't it....2 options - in or out....LOL
I think I agree. Probably pretty borderline at this point. Hard to say, but probably not.
Definitely needs a retirement of his # here in Sac, though. Vlade, too.
Bricklayer
Don't Make Me Use The Bat
The long time theory was if he ever got a title, he would be in. Without it = probably not.
He's right there on the borderline though. If his knee holds out for another month in '03 and we win the title as many expected, he likely makes it. If Detroit does not choke last spring and then gets past the Spurs, he maybe makes it (it not being as huge a deal because he wasn not the main man). As is, probably not. On sheer talent, yes. One of the top 10 PFs of all time. But could just never quite get over that hump, never totally escape his own body breaking down.
As an aside, the way this question was worded, is Webb HOF worthy? I answered Yes. He is worthy. If he makes it its like the Barkley situation -- not title, but no shame. But if you had asked WILL he make it, my answer would be most likely no.
He's right there on the borderline though. If his knee holds out for another month in '03 and we win the title as many expected, he likely makes it. If Detroit does not choke last spring and then gets past the Spurs, he maybe makes it (it not being as huge a deal because he wasn not the main man). As is, probably not. On sheer talent, yes. One of the top 10 PFs of all time. But could just never quite get over that hump, never totally escape his own body breaking down.
As an aside, the way this question was worded, is Webb HOF worthy? I answered Yes. He is worthy. If he makes it its like the Barkley situation -- not title, but no shame. But if you had asked WILL he make it, my answer would be most likely no.
Last edited:
That's just plain silly. Lots of people have made it into the Basketball HOF without a championship -- Pete Maravich, Nate Thurmond, George Gervin, Charles Barkley, Maurice Stokes, Connie Hawkins, Drazen Petrovic and AJ English spring right to mind -- and lots more will do so in the future. Malone and Stockton will be there, without rings. Ewing and Webber probably will too.
Just don't expect it to be tomorrow. The HOF is very slow to act, they don't even have Michael Jordan on the list yet.
Jerryaki
Starter
a retirement has to be in the works for those two. if not...i would just be speechless at how the franchise could do such a thing to two such pivotal figures in its history.
is vlade in the hall of fame? if not, i think he should be. he may not have the sheer numbers and talent as webber, but his role in being a global ambassador for the game has been pretty important to the league's development (the same reason why i expect yao ming to get in eventually).
Last edited:
I don't think it's going to happen -- his legacy being mostly missed opportunities and "almost" teams that couldn't quite win the big one. At his peak though, he was without a doubt a Hall of Fame caliber of player. I'd like to see him make it, and I'd like to see his jersey retired in Sacramento, but if I had to bet I'd bet against both of those happening. Actually, I take that back. I can see the jersey retirement happening. That would be a great moment for the Kings.
Last edited:
Bricklayer
Don't Make Me Use The Bat
As an aside, Webb's career averages:
20.7 points, 9.8 rebounds, 4.2 assists, 1.44 steals, 1.44 blocks
You figure Chris Mullin is in there. Injury prone, no titles, short prime. Nate Tiny Archibald is in there. Short prime, not titles. Alex English is in -- just a scorer, but career numbers. Nique ditto. Barkley, injury prone, no titles. Miller might make it with no titles. Pete Maracich. There are numerous precedents now, probably moreso with the extreme concentration of NBA titles in only a few teams over the last few years. If you have to win a title to get in then you would come up wiht an awfully short list of guys in the last 20 years who could make it -- Zeke, Hakeem, Drexler, Admiral, Duncan, Shaq, Kobe, Michael and Pippen would pretty much be the entire list. Maybe Wade one day. Or Rodman if you were insane. Or Dumars...oh, wait, they did put him in. Anyway...
Guys I would compare to Webb -- ubertalents with injury problems and never got over the top:
Chris Mullin
Charles Barkley
Kevin Johnson
20.7 points, 9.8 rebounds, 4.2 assists, 1.44 steals, 1.44 blocks
You figure Chris Mullin is in there. Injury prone, no titles, short prime. Nate Tiny Archibald is in there. Short prime, not titles. Alex English is in -- just a scorer, but career numbers. Nique ditto. Barkley, injury prone, no titles. Miller might make it with no titles. Pete Maracich. There are numerous precedents now, probably moreso with the extreme concentration of NBA titles in only a few teams over the last few years. If you have to win a title to get in then you would come up wiht an awfully short list of guys in the last 20 years who could make it -- Zeke, Hakeem, Drexler, Admiral, Duncan, Shaq, Kobe, Michael and Pippen would pretty much be the entire list. Maybe Wade one day. Or Rodman if you were insane. Or Dumars...oh, wait, they did put him in. Anyway...
Guys I would compare to Webb -- ubertalents with injury problems and never got over the top:
Chris Mullin
Charles Barkley
Kevin Johnson
Last edited:
kupman
Starter
Then you answered the question as it was asked. That is, if you had a vote, would you vote yes or no. The question is not meant as a prediction.
Just to clarify.
1. It's Alex English who's in the Hall of Fame, not AJ English. I nitpick only because there actually was an AJ English.
2. Of the eleven other players you named, seven of them have substantially better numbers than Webber. Of two of the four who do not (Maravich and Petrovic), I will remind you that...
2a. It is the Basketball Hall of Fame, not the NBA Hall of Fame: Maravich, in addition to having a solid (if unspectacular) NBA career, also happens to be the most prolific scorer in men's college basketball history. Maravich averaged 44.2 per over a three-year college career; that should have been enough to get him into the Hall even if he'd never played a second of NBA ball. And Petrovic being inducted has as much to do (more I would say) with his impact on international basketball as with his NBA career... And it seems transparent that somebody was projecting out Stokes' career to put him in, or else got a sympathy induction.
The only player on your list that reasonably should not have gotten in/should not have gotten in before Webber is Hawkins.
3. I agree with Bricklayer, with regards to semantics. Going by the numbers alone, Webber is most certainly Hall of Fame "worthy." In fact, you'd be hard-pressed to find a player with better numbers who isn't in. Now, whether he's likely to get in? That's a much more difficult question to answer: fair or not, I think that entirely too many voters are going to hold both the fact that he never won a championship and what happened at Michigan against him.
EDIT - Having seen kupman's response, If I had a vote, I still don't know: I think that, by the numbers, he's in, but I don't think that the Hall of Fame should be decided "by the numbers." I mean, Webber had seven great years in Sacramento, but he had an NBA career that spanned fourteen years. For all his talent, I don't know that you could say that he was all that relevant on the NBA level for more than half his career, even before his body betrayed him; Webber spent four years in Washington as the Elton Brand of the east, and never even made an All-NBA team before he got to Sacramento, so I'd really need more time to make up my mind.
Maybe he hasn't turned in his retirement papers? Nobody can possibly believe that Jordan isn't a near-unanimous first ballot Hall of Famer, so if he's not on the ballot, we can only conclude that he's not eligible yet.
Last edited:
Bricklayer
Don't Make Me Use The Bat
NEAR-unanimous?
The guy/gal who doesn't vote him in should be out on his *** the next day. They don't even need a vote. Or procedure. Or waiting periods, or any of that other bunk. they should just tell him, Mr. Jordan, you pick your day. Whenever you want to show up, you're in.
Last edited by a moderator:
Yeah, I remember both of them, but made the unfortunate decision to post while half awake.
That may be, although that's unlikely to apply to both Olajuwon and Ewing, for example. They definitely do have some catching up to do.
While trying to find out whether MJ was officially retired from the NBA or not, I stumbled across this, which seems to be both non-authoritative and out of date, but is still kinda interesting.
http://www.databasebasketball.com/leaders/leadershof.htm
Bricklayer
Don't Make Me Use The Bat
Have been watching that little device they have over there for years, and its pretty good actually. Not 100%, but about right. And about right with Webb too -- just right on that in/out cusp stastically/achievementwise. Minus the off court stuff could be. With it...longshot.
Last edited:
Ryan
I like turtles
I voted yes, but mainly for what he accomplished as a member of the Fab 5. I think a lot of people forget how much he changed the game. Remember how they were the first team to wear black socks, and then the sale of black socks went through the roof?? I know that's a minor example, but its just goes to show how much of an impact he had on the game.
Remember, this isn't just the NBA Hall of Fame, it's the "Basketball" Hall of Fame
Remember, this isn't just the NBA Hall of Fame, it's the "Basketball" Hall of Fame
Last edited:
I was kind of amazed at how focused the Basketball HoF seems to be on Podoloff Trophy winners (NBA MVPs). From '55, when they came up with the award, until '94, the only NBA MVP who has not yet been put into the HoF is Jordan. It seems to be as automatic as knighthoods for retired prime ministers.
It'd be nice if the other criteria were as predictable, but politics and random factors seem to play a major role. Kinda like the Oscars. :-/
It'd be nice if the other criteria were as predictable, but politics and random factors seem to play a major role. Kinda like the Oscars. :-/
GoGoGadget
All-Star
I have to kind of mirror some of the earlier comments in this thread -- I voted yes in the poll because I think he's worthy of the recognition. However, as has already been stated, there are several reasons that I think he likely won't make it in.
I'm a "small hall" guy. So no. Very, very sadly no.
love_them_kings
Starter
I agree completely. It's going to be a close call and it will be interesting to see. It's amazing how life changes in a second. That injury could have prevented Webb from being a player that would have been a no brainer hall of famer. As it is, it can't take away what he did during his career, but whether or not it was enough remains to be seen.
fansinceday1
Starter
If Adrian Dantley still isnt in the HOF then no, Webb shouldn't be in either.
DocHolliday
Starter
I liked CWebb and all, but if we all take of our Kingsfan blinders I think the truth is No. In my opinion the Hall of Fame is for champions. I realize not everyone inducted has been a champion, this even goes for the football HOF, but that's just my personal opinion.
These are team sports, and while individual stats are great, if you could never help your team enough to win a championship then you don't belong in the HOF.
These are team sports, and while individual stats are great, if you could never help your team enough to win a championship then you don't belong in the HOF.
ZZE916
Bench
No. If he had retired after his 2003 injury, maybe. But I think his leagacy is going to be one of a disgruntled, aging, ailing former star who was doing everything he could to try to regain his reputation as an elite player. That approach killed his teams, and his reputation. He did give the Kings the best years of his life, and his jersey should be retired.
mcsluggo
Starter
had he not been injurwed he would have had a strong case, but he really only played at a truly elite level during his years in Sac prior to the injury.
before he came to sac he was an immature player that wasn't living up to his potential and was viewed as a distraction off the court. After Sac he was a fading over-the-hill-er. Furthermore, for what-ever reason, he has always had a worse rap than he deserved. WHen he was underachieving and immature, people talked about him as if he were Isaiah Rider, which is total BS. And then WHILE he was in Sac, and playing at near mvp levels, he was still viewed as Derrik Coleman or Rashweed Wallace, also crap.
frankly, while I think he SHOULD deserve MUCH more consideration than say, Mitch Richmond, I don't think he really has a chance (while Mitch has an outside, though unlikely, shot).
before he came to sac he was an immature player that wasn't living up to his potential and was viewed as a distraction off the court. After Sac he was a fading over-the-hill-er. Furthermore, for what-ever reason, he has always had a worse rap than he deserved. WHen he was underachieving and immature, people talked about him as if he were Isaiah Rider, which is total BS. And then WHILE he was in Sac, and playing at near mvp levels, he was still viewed as Derrik Coleman or Rashweed Wallace, also crap.
frankly, while I think he SHOULD deserve MUCH more consideration than say, Mitch Richmond, I don't think he really has a chance (while Mitch has an outside, though unlikely, shot).