Author Topic: Should Vince Carter be a HOF'er?  (Read 20574 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Should Vince Carter be a HOF'er?
« Reply #30 on: February 18, 2011, 07:54:52 PM »

Offline Onslaught

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1768
  • Tommy Points: 156
Should he? No
Will He? I'm not sure. I hope not.

He could jump out of the building. But that's about all he could really do if you ask me. One of the more overrated players in the last 15 years in my book.
Peace through Tyranny

Re: Should Vince Carter be a HOF'er?
« Reply #31 on: February 18, 2011, 08:14:03 PM »

Offline KobeGotRondoD

  • Payton Pritchard
  • Posts: 112
  • Tommy Points: 27
absolutely not

Re: Should Vince Carter be a HOF'er?
« Reply #32 on: February 18, 2011, 08:19:52 PM »

Offline colincb

  • NCE
  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5095
  • Tommy Points: 501
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/hof_prob_career.html

According to this model which appears to be track pretty well to actual HOF electability, our current Big 3 are all locks to get in and Reggie hasn't a snowball's chance.  By the numbers as they stand today, VC would be the highest rated player not to get in if he didn't (and the current highest rated player not to get in is our very own JoJo White [Gary Payton isn't eligible yet and seems likely to get in as his score is high enough and he was a great defender too]).  The way VC got out of Toronto could very well against him, so there's a decent chance he won't.

BTW, Reggie didn't play a lick of defense.

Re: Should Vince Carter be a HOF'er?
« Reply #33 on: February 18, 2011, 08:20:10 PM »

Offline Josh88

  • Joe Mazzulla
  • Posts: 149
  • Tommy Points: 11
Quote
He had almost any many assists as Ray, was a more efficient scorer, got to the line more, and turned it over less.

What advantages Ray has in per game will fade as Ray keeps playing in his decline. If Reggie is one-dimensional and doesn't deserve to get in, neither does Ray. Look at per36 stats and advanced % stats, I don't think you can make the case Reggie is one-dimensional and Ray isn't.

The HoF is subjective, but I think you're pigeon holing Reggie as a Jamal Crawford one note player. He really wasn't.

I disagree. Ray has one championship under his belt (hopefully two soon), 10 all-star appearances vs. 5, has higher career APG and RPG averages and consistently posted higher PPG in his prime. Neither his RPG nor APG will drop below Reggie's numbers unless he plays until he's 40. All of these things contribute to HOF selections, overall Ray just has the better resume.

Re: Should Vince Carter be a HOF'er?
« Reply #34 on: February 18, 2011, 09:50:07 PM »

Offline Who

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 47136
  • Tommy Points: 2401
No, he should have been one though.

Wasted too much time on poor teams and coasted through too much of his career.
« Last Edit: February 18, 2011, 09:55:57 PM by Who »

Re: Should Vince Carter be a HOF'er?
« Reply #35 on: February 18, 2011, 09:55:22 PM »

Offline Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 58554
  • Tommy Points: -25636
  • Bo Knows: Joe Don't Know Diddley
No, he should have been one though.

Wasted too much time on poor teams and was coasted through too much of his career.

That's how I see it.  Carter has the talent to be one of the all-time greats.  He's got more physical talent than Pierce or Ray, but never put his game together like they did.


I'M THE SILVERBACK GORILLA IN THIS MOTHER——— AND DON'T NONE OF YA'LL EVER FORGET IT!@ 34 minutes

Re: Should Vince Carter be a HOF'er?
« Reply #36 on: February 19, 2011, 12:06:38 PM »

Offline ManUp

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8509
  • Tommy Points: 285
  • Rondo doesn't believe in easy buckets...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SRruru769HI&feature=related

I can't support having a player like the one shown above going to the hall of fame. Especially when I know his all-star births are based off half a season played and popularity. Maybe they can make a dunking hall of fame and he can be in that.
« Last Edit: February 19, 2011, 07:59:44 PM by ManUp »

Re: Should Vince Carter be a HOF'er?
« Reply #37 on: February 19, 2011, 12:48:37 PM »

Offline Donoghus

  • Global Moderator
  • Bill Russell
  • ******************************
  • Posts: 30939
  • Tommy Points: 1607
  • What a Pub Should Be
No.

It's not the Hall of "Medicorely Good"


2010 CB Historical Draft - Best Overall Team

Re: Should Vince Carter be a HOF'er?
« Reply #38 on: February 19, 2011, 12:50:46 PM »

Offline soap07

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1557
  • Tommy Points: 145
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SRruru769HI&feature=related

I can't support having a player like the one shown above going to the play-offs. Especially when I know his all-star births are based off half a season played and popularity. Maybe they can make a dunking hall of fame and he can be in that.

Yikes, I think I can find an instance where a HOF'er missed key free throws.


To Roy's point...

Quote
"That's how I see it.  Carter has the talent to be one of the all-time greats.  He's got more physical talent than Pierce or Ray, but never put his game together like they did.

I'm not sure Carter never put his game together. Antoine Walker never put his game together. Vince Carter will end up scoring around 23-24,000 points, average 5 rebounds, and 4 assists for his career. This is a guy who was named to multiple All-NBA teams. That's not someone who is ultimately all that disappoint - that's someone who was stuck on terrible teams the vast majority of his career.

Re: Should Vince Carter be a HOF'er?
« Reply #39 on: February 19, 2011, 12:52:38 PM »

Offline Fan from VT

  • NCE
  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4205
  • Tommy Points: 777
This is just plain interesting, if you step back, and try to separate intrinsic dislike/loyalty of particular players:

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=1&p1=allenra02&y1=2011&p2=millere01&y2=2005&p3=cartevi01&y3=2011

Re: Should Vince Carter be a HOF'er?
« Reply #40 on: February 19, 2011, 12:55:47 PM »

Offline soap07

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1557
  • Tommy Points: 145
No.

It's not the Hall of "Medicorely Good"


Quote
Vince - career 20,187 points (40th all time) - I could see him conceivably scoring between 2000-3000 more points for his career, which would give him more than Barkley, Parrish, Baylor, Drexler, Payton, Bird and David Robinson, among others. For his career, he's averaging 22.5/5.3/4.1 - pretty versatile over about 900 games. 8 All Star games, ROY, 1 All NBA 2nd team, 1 All NBA 3rd team.

I just don't see this is "Mediocrely Good". I see him, in his prime, as one of the best in the game, and consistently productive for the rest of his career. He was an elite scorer, good rebounder for his position and a good passer. He was stuck on terrible teams and aside from forcing a trade from Toronto, he had a great career that at this point, he's not being recognized for.

Re: Should Vince Carter be a HOF'er?
« Reply #41 on: February 19, 2011, 12:59:50 PM »

Offline soap07

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1557
  • Tommy Points: 145
This is just plain interesting, if you step back, and try to separate intrinsic dislike/loyalty of particular players:

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=1&p1=allenra02&y1=2011&p2=millere01&y2=2005&p3=cartevi01&y3=2011

Now, that is interesting. Vince, in his playoff career compared to Reggie's, has a higher career PER, PPG, RPG, and APG.

Reggie has him beat in shooting percentage, (eFG% = .544 to .487)....but one guy is considered a great clutch performer and one is considered "mediocrely good".

 

Re: Should Vince Carter be a HOF'er?
« Reply #42 on: February 19, 2011, 01:08:22 PM »

Offline Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 58554
  • Tommy Points: -25636
  • Bo Knows: Joe Don't Know Diddley
This is just plain interesting, if you step back, and try to separate intrinsic dislike/loyalty of particular players:

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=1&p1=allenra02&y1=2011&p2=millere01&y2=2005&p3=cartevi01&y3=2011

Now, that is interesting. Vince, in his playoff career compared to Reggie's, has a higher career PER, PPG, RPG, and APG.

Reggie has him beat in shooting percentage, (eFG% = .544 to .487)....but one guy is considered a great clutch performer and one is considered "mediocrely good".

 

Playoff stats:

Ray: 101 games played, .531 eFG%, .584 TS%, Win Shares Per 48: .156 
Reggie: 144 games played, .526 eFG%, .601 TS%, WS/48: .180
Vince: 56 games played, .451 eFG%, .514 TS%, WS/48: .137

Vince's very small number of playoff games played, along with his generally poor eFG% and TS%, are what makes him stand out.  He was a guy who put up empty stats, but didn't help his team win, and didn't score with a lot of efficiency, especially in the playoffs.


I'M THE SILVERBACK GORILLA IN THIS MOTHER——— AND DON'T NONE OF YA'LL EVER FORGET IT!@ 34 minutes

Re: Should Vince Carter be a HOF'er?
« Reply #43 on: February 19, 2011, 01:12:29 PM »

Offline incoherent

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1855
  • Tommy Points: 278
  • 7 + 11 = 18
Too bad for Vince they don't put Dunks in the hall of fame.

Would like to see a wax statue of him dunking over that 7 footer.


But.. No, he clearly should not go to the HoF.

Re: Should Vince Carter be a HOF'er?
« Reply #44 on: February 19, 2011, 01:13:37 PM »

Offline Fan from VT

  • NCE
  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4205
  • Tommy Points: 777
There are a couple of reasons I find Vince Carter discussions interesting. In no particular order:

-Ignoring circumstances: Vince hasn't had much deep playoff success. Question is, when should he have? Swap him and Kobe...VC is easily the swing man banana on Shaq's Laker teams. Teammates matter.

-Perception over results: Carter has been very productive in his career, including in his playoff opportunities. But we keep on thinking he should be doing more, and penalize him for that. If someone else did the exact same thing as vince on the court but looked a little differently doing it, he'd have a completely different reputation.

-We think we KNOW what vince could have been: Vince is penalized because we strongly believe that we KNOW how good he COULD have been. But what if WE are wrong? What if this is how good he is? Not living up to OUR expectations doesn't change what he has produced on the court. If we had expected less...say he was drafted 25th...then put up the exact same career, would we think about his HOF eligibility differently? If so, I think that he should be in, because I fail to see how our expectations or lack thereof actually change what was accomplished on the court.