Ex-Bulls representing the Hall of Fame finalists

Reggie Miller apparently wasn't good enough to get nominated on his first ballot.   However, while I think it's ridiculous, I'm not a Pacers fan, so I'm not going to rant too much about it's ridiculousness.

The good news is three ex-Bulls are finalists for the Hall.   Dennis Rodman, Dick Motta, and Tex Winter.   Here is the list of the 12 finalists:

Dennis Rodman
Jamaal Wilkes
Chris Mullin
Maurice Cheeks
Ralph Sampson
Teresa Edwards (Olympian)
Tara Van Derveer (Stanford women's coach)
Dick Motta
Tex Winter
Herb Magee (Philadelphia University coach)
Hank Nichols (college ref)
Al Attles

When looking at this class, my first thought is, really?

I thought Dennis Rodman was a dicey case to every make the hall of fame, but Ralph Sampson?   Chris Mullin?   Jamaal Wilkes?  Maurice Cheeks?  Al Attles?   Of course we also have the whole list of contributor/coach/non NBA caliber league nominees (of course Tex Winter and Dick Motta are in this group though I'll certainly be rooting for Tex).

Rodman seems like a lock next to this group.  

So who gets in out of the group?   I'd like to hope that Tex gets in, but I can't argue too strongly for Tex given my own belief that the hall of fame is filled with too many contributor types and not enough players. 

The only guy that feels like a lock to me is Rodman but given that the hall is so crazy, who can really say.

Comments

Leave a comment
  • The Hall of Fame is a JOKE! College ref? WTF Ralph Sampson at least had 3 good years but still theres no one on this list other than perhaps rodman and perhaps Tara Van Derveer who should get in

  • Chris Mullin's haircut deserves to be in the hall of fame.

  • good god, this celebrity game is really horrible. A really long bad sitcom episode

  • I certainly appreciate Tex Winter, but did the Triangle really revolutionize basketball?

    It's only been run successfully by teams with absolutely elite talent, and even then Kobe/Jordan frequently abandoned it to create on their own.

  • I think anyone who DOESN'T think Rodman should be a dead solid lock for the Hall of Fame, frankly, should have their heads examined (and I apologize to all my colleagues on this board and to you, Doug, as well, but COME ON!). Rodman, despite his piercings, tattoos, general nuttiness, drunkenness, etc, was an integral part of 5 world championship teams - won SEVEN rebounding titles in a row - was Defensive Player of the Year TWO years in a row, was 1st Team All-Defensive NBA SEVEN times...it's an easy case.

  • In reply to MadTown56:

    Do you allow specialists into the hall of fame? Rodman was a specialist. I've been in favor of putting him in the hall of fame based on how I think the hall of fame should be though.

  • In reply to DougThonus:

    Well, I don't really want to start an argument because I very much respect your opinion, Doug, and those of almost all the posters on this forum, but if Rodman was a "specialist," by basically devoting his career to defense and rebounding, he "specialized" in approximately half of the game of basketball. How many players are in the HoF because they could fill it up on the offensive end but were no more than matadors when the other team had the ball? Were players like George Gervin and Dominique Wilkins "specialists"? If Rodman had averaged 13 or 15 points, or, hell, even 10 points per game throughout his career and wasn't the assclown of the century for the last half of his career and since, are we even having this discussion? I could argue that a guy like Rick Barry, in his own way, was as much a "dspecialist" as Rodman...and since Reggie Miller was part of this discussion earlier on, I don't recall him ever being that interested in playing D...oh well, you get my point.

  • In reply to MadTown56:

    Great points, MadTown56! Doug really woke you up.

  • In reply to MadTown56:

    Follow the money to see how much Rodman was valued by people making those decisions. Would prime Dennis Rodman even get a max contract? Would he be viewed as a top 10 player in the NBA right now?

    The answer to those questions are both no IMO. This isn't to say Rodman isn't deserving, because I don't think the hall of fame needs to only value all around players.

  • In reply to DougThonus:

    Well, don't you think Ben Wallace a few years ago was a pretty good comparison? I mean, no one I don't think ever considered Wallace a Top 10 player in this league but the Bulls paid pretty damn close to top dollar to bring him to Chicago (and get him out of Detroit as well, of course). I think Rodman, at the stage of his career where he was when we gulped hard and gave up on Will Perdue for him, was most definitely not for everybody, and probably almost no other teams in the league besides the Bulls had the confidence (and of the course the veteran leadership in MJ, Scottie, Phil, etc) to take the chance on him. Obviously it paid off big time for us. Do we repeat the threepeat with Toni Kukoc as our starting power forward, even with MJ coming back in superb basketball condition? Hard to say. Look, I understand that Rodman is a special case (a special "head" case), but based on his accomplishments with the Pistons and the Bulls I strongly think he deserves a plaque in Cooperstown. Oops. Wrong HoF!!
    And regarding "all around players"...well, I again will just point out that there are plenty of players in the HoF who really weren't "all-around players" if you consider what they brought on the defensive side of the ball. I named a few yesterday, I could probably name 20 more without thinking that hard about it. Rodman was, if you will, like an offensive lineman in the NFL; did the dirty work but boy your team isn't going anywhere without him.

  • In reply to MadTown56:

    Is Ben Wallace a future hall of famer? I think that is a good comparison.

    Anyway, like I said, I'm not against Dennis. I just don't think it's a no-brainer. You could never build around Dennis because he wasn't an all around player.

  • In reply to DougThonus:

    If a 4 time defensive player of the year isn't a first ballot hall of famer then they should rename it to the hall of offense.

  • In reply to DougThonus:

    Max contracts are a bad measure because they're given at least partly on the basis of whether they'll make money not win games. Scoring sells tickets and merchandise, defense and rebounding doesn't. Michael Redd got a max contract and he's more one dimensional than Rodman ever was, and a far inferior player.

  • In reply to DontLetsStart:

    Defenders / Rebounders are also easier to find and less valuable. While defense and rebounding are important for winning games, they're more commodity skills than those who can score against great defense.

  • In reply to DougThonus:

    If Dennis Rodman was just a good rebounder then maybe that would make sense. But Rodman's rebounding was off the charts, he has the top 6 seasons ever in rebound rate. You simply can't find guys who were remotely as good as he was at his particular skill. You can find scorers at least in the same timezone of being as good as Jordan. You simply can not find rebounders remotely as good as Rodman.

    He may not have been an all round player but he was simply so good at what he did that he should be recognised.

  • In reply to DontLetsStart:

    Thank you, Shakes. Couldn't have said it better myself. And by the way, Doug, when I brought up Ben Wallace, my point was that his skills etc were apparently valued enough by the Bulls that they paid him max money or damn well near it. However, it quickly became clear that he wasn't worth it. Wallace was 32 his first season in Chicago. Rodman was 34 when he joined the Bulls, and he led the league in rebounding all three seasons he wore a Bulls uniform. No, Ben Wallace is most certainly NOT a Hall of Famer. In a way, that's kind of my point. He is NOT a Hall of Famer and yet in some ways he is the closest player of the last ten years or so to Rodman - although MUCH less productive - and he STILL was offered top dollar when he became a free agent. Rodman was a better player for the skill set at 36 than Wallace was at 30.
    You'll be pleased to note that this is my LAST post on this subject. Surely my inexorable logic has worn you down by now!

  • In reply to DougThonus:

    Lee Smith was a "specialist" who allowed a lot of runs per nine innings.

    Dennis Rodman was a 6'6" forward who grabbed nearly 3-of-10 available rebounds and closed off the most important players in the game from scoring every night.

  • I know it's off-topic....But can't help smile at Taj... He just doesn't know how to play without boxing out or going for rebounds and playing defense...He has let go of blocking though for a day.

  • In reply to schaumburgfan:

    Hollinger had a great line:

    Taj Gibson is actually trying to play defense and it's annoying the crap out of Cousins

  • In reply to DougThonus:

    It's funny because Gibson was clearly told to stop playing defense, and he looks really uncomfortable.

  • In reply to DougThonus:

    Wow, please don't question Chris Mullin's legitimacy as a HOFer!! He was on the Dream Team for a reason (unlike Leattner). He averaged over 25 PPG five years in a row and his career FG% is above 50%. Sure he was with the Warriors, but they were a playoff team several years he was there in large part because of him, and this is back when you hand checks were legal and some of the greatest players were around to go up against (see Dream Team note). You can't really find an SG these days who shoots as well as he did overall. His career numbers are certainly solid:

    Games: 986
    Points: 17,911
    PPG: 18.2
    Rebounds: 4.1
    Assists: 3.5
    Steals: 1.6
    FG%: 50.9%
    3FG%: 38.4%
    FT%: 86.5%

  • In reply to ironsam:

    Laettner was very deserving of that Dream Team spot when you consider the tug o' war it took for that team to not be all college players.

    But yeah, I'm cool with Chris Mullin in the HOF. His numbers were alongside stupid-crazy ballstoppers and produced huge. Problem was injuries and never having a coach who wasn't a joke after George Karl. This class for an NBA HOF, meh. Considering that his St. Johns history is significant for this HOF, he deserves it more than women's league players and coaches, Euros, and NCAA men's coaches.

  • In reply to LittleAlex:

    For the record, I loved Tim Hardaway and Mitch Richmond as a kid, but they had issues understanding Mullin was the best scorer on the team, IMO.

  • In reply to ironsam:

    Yeah, maybe his numbers are a bit better than I thought.

  • In reply to DougThonus:

    Very Funny!!!!!

  • Great list, Mitch!

  • You basically have only one coach in the league running the triangle successfully and that's Jackson who got it from Winter.

    To have revolutionized the sport, it would need to have spread and then been copied and used by others, but no one else has successfully done it.

  • In reply to DougThonus:

    Considering guys like Don Nelson would get in eventually, just being a part of a scheme which has won 11 championships should get Winter in. Kobe didn't win before Phil even with a prime Shaq. Off-course, Phil is the main guy but there has to be somebody else along with him who has to be responsible for this to work. I don't think there is anybody else on Phil Jackson's coaching staff who has been considered or will be considered.

  • In reply to schaumburgfan:

    I'm not saying Tex isn't worth consideration, just that the triangle hardly revolutionized basketball. It's a niche offense which has only been successfully used by Jackson and while it's won many titles, the teams winning those titles have all had talent that was title worthy in any offense.

  • The Drew Gooden one inch square on the back of the neck deserves a nod too.

Leave a comment