PDA

View Full Version : Should Chris Webber be in the HALL of FAME?



MoBASS
03-26-2008, 12:50 PM
One of only 5 guys to average 20/9/4 for his career.

Would've won a title if not for "THE straight-on 3" by Robert Horry (game 4 playoffs, down 2-1).

Personally I never liked the guy (partly because I'm a Lakers fan) but I have respect for him as a player.

NYstateofMinD
03-26-2008, 01:38 PM
He was defiantly one of my favorite players back in the day. He did always play great and I think he deserves to be considered. No one will remember him for his great days, instead they will remember him when he blew out his knee and played for the sixers.

DerekRE_3
03-26-2008, 01:39 PM
Chris Webber is one of the best passing big men ever. Before his knee injury he had great athleticism and talent. He was great in the low post, the open floor, and could hit the mid range shot. After he got hurt it was his defense that suffered the most so most people don't remember that he was a good defender as well. Look at his numbers while he was with the Kings before his knee injury.

1998: 19.98 ppg 12.98 rpb 4.12 asst 2.12 blk 48% fg 45% ft (terrible I know)
1999: 24.45 ppg 10.49 rpb 4.60 asst 1.71 blk 48% fg 75% ft (up 30%)
2000: 27.11 ppg 11.10 rpg 4.20 asst 1.33 blk 48% fg 70% ft
2001: 24.48 ppg 10.11 rpg 4.78 asst 1.41 blk 49% fg 75% ft
2002: 23.01 ppg 10.51 rpg 5.43 asst 1.31 blk 46% fg 61% ft

Even in 2005 when he was playing on basicially one leg with the Sixers....
2005: 20.24 ppg 9.88 rpg 3.41 asst .83 blk 43% fg 64% ft

His FG% was way down that year because he had turned into mostly a mid range shooter since he could barely run. His blocks went way down because he could not move well laterally at all. But still, playing on one good leg, he averaged 20 and 10. Pretty incredible.

All people remember now is Webber hobbling around the court shooting mid range jumpers. He used to run the floor and dunk on guys like Charles Barkley.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=I3qpJTE7vy8&feature=related

jmaest
03-26-2008, 01:39 PM
He's going in. He has the numbers and played well, when he actually played.

Me personally, I don't think of Webber as a "great" player. But he's going in.

thesparky33
03-26-2008, 02:40 PM
Webber is definitely going into the HOF. This shouldnt even be debated IMO.

TmacYao2
03-26-2008, 02:55 PM
He should, but i don't think he will.

jmaest
03-26-2008, 03:15 PM
Chris Webber is one of the best passing big men ever. Before his knee injury he had great athleticism and talent. He was great in the low post, the open floor, and could hit the mid range shot. After he got hurt it was his defense that suffered the most so most people don't remember that he was a good defender as well. Look at his numbers while he was with the Kings before his knee injury.

1998: 19.98 ppg 12.98 rpb 4.12 asst 2.12 blk 48% fg 45% ft (terrible I know)
1999: 24.45 ppg 10.49 rpb 4.60 asst 1.71 blk 48% fg 75% ft (up 30%)
2000: 27.11 ppg 11.10 rpg 4.20 asst 1.33 blk 48% fg 70% ft
2001: 24.48 ppg 10.11 rpg 4.78 asst 1.41 blk 49% fg 75% ft
2002: 23.01 ppg 10.51 rpg 5.43 asst 1.31 blk 46% fg 61% ft

Even in 2005 when he was playing on basicially one leg with the Sixers....
2005: 20.24 ppg 9.88 rpg 3.41 asst .83 blk 43% fg 64% ft

His FG% was way down that year because he had turned into mostly a mid range shooter since he could barely run. His blocks went way down because he could not move well laterally at all. But still, playing on one good leg, he averaged 20 and 10. Pretty incredible.

All people remember now is Webber hobbling around the court shooting mid range jumpers. He used to run the floor and dunk on guys like Charles Barkley.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=I3qpJTE7vy8&feature=related


One highlight does not a player make. Webber is not on the level of Barkley nor is he someone that actually played the game as aggressively as that highlight might mislead you to think he did.

thesparky33
03-26-2008, 03:53 PM
He should, but i don't think he will.

What makes you think that he wont? His career was magnificent IMO.

TmacYao2
03-26-2008, 04:10 PM
There have been better players who are more deserving than Chris Webber.

Dennis Johnson, Artis Gilmore.

TmacYao2
03-26-2008, 04:11 PM
his chances on Basketball reference is 65%
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/w/webbech01.html

TmacYao2
03-26-2008, 04:12 PM
his chances on Basketball reference is 65%
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/w/webbech01.html

TmacYao2
03-26-2008, 04:13 PM
his chances on Basketball reference is 65%
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/w/webbech01.html

thesparky33
03-26-2008, 04:18 PM
They also say that Vince Carter's probability of making the HOF at 94%...

cynomatic
03-26-2008, 04:27 PM
He was really good ...but I dont see him in the HOF

DerekRE_3
03-26-2008, 04:34 PM
One highlight does not a player make. Webber is not on the level of Barkley nor is he someone that actually played the game as aggressively as that highlight might mislead you to think he did.

Yeah I know that my point was that people's view of Webber is based on only the last few years of his career. Post-Injury. People need to remember that he was once very athletic and one of the most talented big men in the league. he used to be at Garnett's level.

phillyrealist
03-26-2008, 04:38 PM
If Chris Webber goes to the HOF it would be an insult to all past present and future HOF's. He was very good in Sacramento when he had some talent around him, but he could NEVER CARRY A TEAM. And another thing............


TIMEOUT......MY KNEE HURTS AGAIN

DerekRE_3
03-26-2008, 04:44 PM
It's not Webber's fault that he got hurt. He played in pain for about two years until his knee just basically collapsed. He was a tough guy, to a fault. And the Kings were a TEAM. They didn't need a guy like Webber to carry them. That wasn't their style of play. They used all 5 guys on the court and went 9-10 guys deep on the bench.

SeoulBeatz
03-26-2008, 04:55 PM
Sorry DerekRE, the dude who just posted above u has obviously only seen the Philly Chris Webber.

I'm from philly and i watched him play in almost 200 games while he was there (never missed one). He was slow, and hobbled. It was just a shame to see him that way. But, he did what he could with the injuries that he was dealing with and had a tremendous year that went unnoticed in 2005-06, just two years ago.

In Sacramento he was a beast, and even before that with the Warrior's and Bullets, he put up extroardinary numbers. And he led his Sacramento team. He was the star there.

but people with miniscule basketball knowledge will not remember this.

so please, disregard his last comment.

The guy deserves to be in the HOF, and it would be an insult to us all not to have him in.

People just dislike him because he has a bad rep, but that all accumulated over the past few years when he was unable to prove the doubters wrong.

DerekRE_3
03-26-2008, 05:00 PM
Yeah in 2005 he averaged 20 and 10 for the sixers. Obviously the AI Webber duo didn't work in Philly but he put up good numbers despite barely being able to move.

dbow2019
03-26-2008, 05:31 PM
He was defiantly one of my favorite players back in the day. He did always play great and I think he deserves to be considered. No one will remember him for his great days, instead they will remember him when he blew out his knee and played for the sixers.

no one will remember him as a sixer, hell he played for us for 2 years and i almost forgot he was here

IMO he deserves to be in, he was an incredible player

Ragun
03-26-2008, 05:37 PM
i think he deserves to be in the HOF.

ThePhxHasRizen
03-26-2008, 05:45 PM
hall of shame!

sunsalltheway03
03-26-2008, 05:56 PM
He definitely should be in. Before the last few years, he was amazing. Great player and should be in.

azmo13
03-26-2008, 06:10 PM
If Chris Webber goes to the HOF it would be an insult to all past present and future HOF's. He was very good in Sacramento when he had some talent around him, but he could NEVER CARRY A TEAM. And another thing............


TIMEOUT......MY KNEE HURTS AGAIN

Agree. No matter how good he was physically, he was horrible mentally. To me he will always be the guy who lost the michigan game by calling that stupid timeout. He continued to sabotage his own team making similar mental mistakes throughout his career. He was known for his inability to carrry his team over the hump in big games. He seems like a good guy and had a great career, but Chris Webber is a living example of the difference between a 5 time all-star and a hall of famer.

DerekRE_3
03-26-2008, 06:30 PM
Agree. No matter how good he was physically, he was horrible mentally. To me he will always be the guy who lost the michigan game by calling that stupid timeout. He continued to sabotage his own team making similar mental mistakes throughout his career. He was known for his inability to carrry his team over the hump in big games. He seems like a good guy and had a great career, but Chris Webber is a living example of the difference between a 5 time all-star and a hall of famer.

You obviously know nothing about the Sacramento Kings during the Webber era. The Kings won and lost as a team. Not because of Webber. I'm gonna guess you are a Laker fan and are used to one or two guys (Kobe and Shaq) being the reason why you won/lost. The Kings were a deep team that involved all 5 guys. Webber was their best player, but he was not their team and he is not the reason why they never won a championship. His job was not to "carry" the team.

azmo13
03-26-2008, 06:43 PM
You obviously know nothing about the Sacramento Kings during the Webber era. The Kings won and lost as a team. Not because of Webber. I'm gonna guess you are a Laker fan and are used to one or two guys (Kobe and Shaq) being the reason why you won/lost. The Kings were a deep team that involved all 5 guys. Webber was their best player, but he was not their team and he is not the reason why they never won a championship. His job was not to "carry" the team.

Yeah Im a Laker fan... and that's exactly WHY I know about the Kings during the Webber era. And no, Kobe and shaq alone were no more the reason we won or lost than any other team with two dominant hall of famers. We had Kobe and Shaq for quite a few years but didn't win crap until Phil brought in some of his old chicago veterans. We often lost because our role players sucked or won BECAUSE PEOPLE LIKE ROBERT HORRY TORE THE KINGS HEARTS OUT. The Lakers were also a deep team that involed all 5 guys. We had some of the best role players in the league in horry, fox, fisher, ron harper and even got decent contributions from guys who are now a bust like devean george. The fact is that Webber wasn't in the same league as Shaq or Kobe and that's why he's not a legitimate HOFer. He also had no clutch and was worse at the end of games when it counted most.

thesparky33
03-26-2008, 06:52 PM
Yeah Im a Laker fan... and that's exactly WHY I know about the Kings during the Webber era. And no, Kobe and shaq alone were no more the reason we won or lost than any other team with two dominant hall of famers. We had Kobe and Shaq for quite a few years but didn't win crap until Phil brought in some of his old chicago veterans. We often lost because our role players sucked or won BECAUSE PEOPLE LIKE ROBERT HORRY TORE THE KINGS HEARTS OUT. The Lakers were also a deep team that involed all 5 guys. We had some of the best role players in the league in horry, fox, fisher, ron harper and even got decent contributions from guys who are now a bust like devean george. The fact is that Webber wasn't in the same league as Shaq or Kobe and that's why he's not a legitimate HOFer. He also had no clutch and was worse at the end of games when it counted most.

No one ever said that Webber is in the same tier as Kobe or Shaq. They are both in the top 25 players of all time most likely. We're talking about the Hall of Fame...

DerekRE_3
03-26-2008, 06:57 PM
thank you.

azmo13
03-26-2008, 06:59 PM
No one ever said that Webber is in the same tier as Kobe or Shaq. They are both in the top 25 players of all time most likely. We're talking about the Hall of Fame...

Future Hall of Fame big guys in this league are people like Duncan, Garnett, Shaq, Karl Malone, etc. People who either

A. did their thing with consistency throughout their career without a tarnished legacy of large numbers of doubters and critics. (garnett and malone)

OR

B. Lead their team to multiple championships (Shaq and Olajuwan)

or both, Like Duncan.

Webber fits neither criteria. He's a just a good player with a good career. Not every good player who made a few all-star teams belongs in the hall of fame.

JordansBulls
03-26-2008, 07:06 PM
I think he has a great chance to make the hall of fame. He probably won't be 1st ballot, but I think he does have a good chance, sort of like Alonzo Mourning.

SwaggaIke
03-26-2008, 07:06 PM
I agree w/ azmo13. Webber put up solid numbers, but he was never a great winner. There is no guarantee that w/o the Lakers that Sacramento would have won championships. If thats the case then the Jazz should have got their championship during the lockout season. What about the Portland teams of Scottie, Rasheed and Mighty Mouse? Jordan retired the first time and the Magic still couldn't win a championship. Webber had immense talent and he deserves to get in at some point, but he should have a nice amount of gray in his hair in beard before that happens.

Also Alonzo Mourning is one of the great players of the 90-00s era. He's going in first ballot. He has the numbers, charisma and an NBA championship.

LA_cabals
03-26-2008, 07:15 PM
I do not think that he will make it as a first-ballot Hall of Famer, but he will eventually make it in. He does not have the credentials (championships, MVP's, scoring champ, etc) nor has he lead the league in anything (except for Rpg in 98-99) to make in the HOF right away, but his career avg's have been consistent for an above average player (not great) to make it in eventually.

DerekRE_3
03-26-2008, 07:17 PM
He didn't lead the nba in any one category...but he averaged 20 and 10 for his career. And he could get you 5 assists a game and is one of the best passing PF to ever play.

TmacYao2
03-27-2008, 12:38 AM
Tim Legler made it clear earlier in halftime when Suns were playing the Celtics.

Webber has a chance to make the hall of fame but it's def not a lock.

Pinstripes4Life
03-27-2008, 01:31 AM
He shouldn't go. Dudes like Malone and Barkley can get in w/o a ring. Webber doesn't cut it.

DODGERS&LAKERS
03-27-2008, 01:58 AM
Chris "TIMEOUT" Webber in the hall of fame????? He should be in the Hall of Shame with that. That is the only thing I remember when his name is mentioned.

DerekRE_3
03-27-2008, 02:03 AM
Always a good idea to ignore an entire career because of one play....

MGB
03-27-2008, 02:58 AM
Future Hall of Fame big guys in this league are people like Duncan, Garnett, Shaq, Karl Malone, etc. People who either

A. did their thing with consistency throughout their career without a tarnished legacy of large numbers of doubters and critics. (garnett and malone)

OR

B. Lead their team to multiple championships (Shaq and Olajuwan)

or both, Like Duncan.

Webber fits neither criteria. He's a just a good player with a good career. Not every good player who made a few all-star teams belongs in the hall of fame.

Agreed. He was a nice player for a long time, but never really a dominant force. I'd say he has a shot, but by no means a lock or definitely deserving of the HOF.

Ender
03-27-2008, 03:46 AM
He's a first ballot lock for the Douche Bag Hall of Fame.

DODGERS&LAKERS
03-27-2008, 03:54 AM
Always a good idea to ignore an entire career because of one play....

It was only one play but it was a constant his whole career. I cant remember out of all those points that he scored if there was ever one that was in crunch time. I watched all those series with the Lakers and I remember Bibby taking all the big shots and knocking them down. Webber disappeared and Peja was throwing air balls. Webber will always be known as a good player but when it came to crunch time he was non existent.

DerekRE_3
03-27-2008, 01:35 PM
It was only one play but it was a constant his whole career. I cant remember out of all those points that he scored if there was ever one that was in crunch time. I watched all those series with the Lakers and I remember Bibby taking all the big shots and knocking them down. Webber disappeared and Peja was throwing air balls. Webber will always be known as a good player but when it came to crunch time he was non existent.

That's because Bibby was our clutch player. You are gonna fault Webber because Bibby was who our coach went to? And at the time everyone would key in on Webber and Peja because Webber was our best all around player and Peja was our lights out shooter. Since the defense would key in on them who would that leave open....Mike Bibby. It's no coincidence that Bibby had his best years when Webber and Peja were on the team. Now he is in his so-called "prime" averaging 12 a game when he used to average 18-20.

NoSense
03-27-2008, 01:50 PM
I don't like the guy, since he had stolen my then-girlfriend, aka Tyra Banks :D but yeah he's a heck of a player but never truly shown sign of being a champion. He should be in the Hall of Fame but ain't no lock for it IMO

DerekRE_3
03-27-2008, 01:52 PM
If Charles Barkley is in it, then Webber is in it.

Tom81
03-27-2008, 02:51 PM
I think he has a great chance to make the hall of fame. He probably won't be 1st ballot, but I think he does have a good chance, sort of like Alonzo Mourning.
I agree,bur ZO have more chance.

CURUKASH
03-27-2008, 03:16 PM
Remember the NBA does not have there own hall of fame like most other sports. So if he gets in though he had a decent NBA Career it will be because of the Fab Five Michigan Wolverines. They did "trancend" the game but I dont think he belongs in the HOF unless the put the Fab 5 together for college achievements but more than likely won't happen since everything they did was stricken from history they never existed.

MassoDio
03-27-2008, 03:31 PM
Chris Webber is definately a Hall of Famer. It's shouldn't even be a discussion. The guy's numbers are better than a lot of people in the Hall of Fame. And there are plenty of players in the Hall of Fame with no championships, who weren't the most clutch players, who didn't average the most points on their team, or take the last shot. The criteria for getting in to the Hall of Fame is based around their body of work. Chris Webber's body of work in the NBA and College were incredibly impressive.

azmo13
04-01-2008, 08:13 PM
If Charles Barkley is in it, then Webber is in it.

Ok.... you just compared chuck... who would DEFINITELY have a ring if it weren't for MJ, was an awesome clutch player and was considered one of the TOP 3 PLAYERS IN THE LEAGUE for most if not all of his career, with.... Chris Webber. You just performed a reductio ad absurdum on yourself. That should end the discussion.

DerekRE_3
04-01-2008, 10:23 PM
Ok.... you just compared chuck... who would DEFINITELY have a ring if it weren't for MJ, was an awesome clutch player and was considered one of the TOP 3 PLAYERS IN THE LEAGUE for most if not all of his career, with.... Chris Webber. You just performed a reductio ad absurdum on yourself. That should end the discussion.

If it weren't for Shaq and Kobe Webber would have won a ring. Also...I don't like it when people say "then so and so would have won a ring..." It's about the team...not the player. And Barkley was overrated. Gave up a ton of points when he played defense.

InsaneSports_07
04-01-2008, 10:27 PM
Yes, he was so consistant for so many years. Never won that championship at Michigan, nor did he win one in the NBA.

MassoDio
04-02-2008, 01:48 AM
It's called the Hall of Fame. Not the Hall of Champions. :rolleyes:

DerekRE_3
04-02-2008, 02:16 AM
It's called the Hall of Fame. Not the Hall of Champions. :rolleyes:

Thank you.

azmo13
04-02-2008, 07:13 PM
If it weren't for Shaq and Kobe Webber would have won a ring. Also...I don't like it when people say "then so and so would have won a ring..." It's about the team...not the player. And Barkley was overrated. Gave up a ton of points when he played defense.

There's no guarantee CW would have won jack without Kobe and Shaq stopping him. Barkley was IN THE FINALS with a team that really wasn't that great. KJ and Dan Majerle were the only guys that stand out on that team besides him. Thats a HELL of a lot more than CW can say for himself. I'd like to see a poll comparing Barkely to Webber. I'm not even going to address this "webber is as good as barkely" garbage anymore.... It's just plain stupid.

I started a thread with a poll comparing the two. That should finish this silly line of reasoning.

DerekRE_3
04-02-2008, 08:14 PM
Um, if the Lakers hadn't beaten the Kings in 2002, the Kings would have SWEPT the Nets easily. To me, the Kings and Lakers were equal as far as talent goes just in different areas, but as you know, one team has to win.

In 10 years Webber's legacy will be different. People need to remember him wearing a Kings uniform instead of a Sixers and Pistons uniform.

vjonesphila@ver
04-02-2008, 08:33 PM
Cris was a good player not great he had to many injuries though out his career!

stawka
04-02-2008, 09:00 PM
Obviously not comparing him to Malone/Barkley, but they didn't win rings either. Yes the old "if Jordan wasn't around they both would have them", same goes for Reggie/Ewing/Penny/Payton/Kemp and the list goes on and on. And like someone said if it weren't for Kobe and Shaq, Webber would have one, 'Sheed/Pippen would have another one, Kidd would have. The "ifs and buts" are endless, but either way Webber put up great numbers on a consistent basis.

Hopefully he's in the HOF because that's all he would get out of such a good NBA career aside from money

azmo13
04-04-2008, 09:24 PM
Um, if the Lakers hadn't beaten the Kings in 2002, the Kings would have SWEPT the Nets easily. To me, the Kings and Lakers were equal as far as talent goes just in different areas, but as you know, one team has to win.

In 10 years Webber's legacy will be different. People need to remember him wearing a Kings uniform instead of a Sixers and Pistons uniform.

And one team did win... the same one... every single year they faced each other in the playoffs. The ones wearing gold.

azmo13
04-04-2008, 09:32 PM
Chris Webber is definately a Hall of Famer. It's shouldn't even be a discussion. The guy's numbers are better than a lot of people in the Hall of Fame. And there are plenty of players in the Hall of Fame with no championships, who weren't the most clutch players, who didn't average the most points on their team, or take the last shot. The criteria for getting in to the Hall of Fame is based around their body of work. Chris Webber's body of work in the NBA and College were incredibly impressive.

I find it rather odd that the majority of basketball fans seem to think that Weber doesn't deserve to be in the HOF and yet, he should just be IN and it shouldn't be a discussion? Generally you say "it shouldn't be a discussion" if everyone agrees. Not when you're voicing a heavily outweighed minority opinion. lol.

azmo13
04-04-2008, 09:34 PM
"Hopefully he's in the HOF because that's all he would get out of such a good NBA career aside from money"

HOF induction is NOT a consolation prize for the ringless.

DerekRE_3
04-04-2008, 10:51 PM
And one team did win... the same one... every single year they faced each other in the playoffs. The ones wearing gold.

Yeah, but that year (2002) was the last time the Lakers faced the Kings in the playoffs. After that Webber got hurt and the Kings began their slow decent.

AirJordanXVIII
04-05-2008, 10:57 PM
Great numbers. But no rings.

Skins4Life
04-05-2008, 11:15 PM
I hope he does, if he doesnt it will be a slap in the face...

primetimekings
04-06-2008, 04:04 AM
He shouldn't go. Dudes like Malone and Barkley can get in w/o a ring. Webber doesn't cut it.

barkley carried his team.malone didnt he had the greatest passing pure pg of all time giving him the rock.and i just remember jordan picking malone and going down and hitting the best shot of the finals ever thats all i remember malone doing

MassoDio
04-07-2008, 02:59 PM
I find it rather odd that the majority of basketball fans seem to think that Weber doesn't deserve to be in the HOF and yet, he should just be IN and it shouldn't be a discussion? Generally you say "it shouldn't be a discussion" if everyone agrees. Not when you're voicing a heavily outweighed minority opinion. lol.

And I find it rather odd that people, who say they know anything about basketball, would consider him not being a hall of famer.
Just because "the majority" of people think something, does not make it correct, logical, or even remotely intelligent thinking. i.e. the Earth was aparantly flat at one point according to "the majority".
And are we not stating our opinions? In my opinion.......this shouldn't even be a discussion.

Chicagofaithful
04-07-2008, 03:14 PM
He would be amongst names such as Larry Bird, and Michael Jordan, NO WAY, hes just a good NBA player not super

DerekRE_3
04-07-2008, 03:22 PM
He was better than good. Calling Chris Webber a "good" player is a huge understatement.

Gunzito22
04-07-2008, 03:46 PM
Sorry, but if I think of the players that have played and retired in the past 10 seasons, he is not even in my top 5... C Webb the name (to me at least) is better than C Webb the career. its a weird situation, b/c Webb was damned good when healthy, but he played smack in the middle of two eras of the NBA, the Bird/ Magic/ Jordan Era (and the great players/teams of the 80's and early 90's) and the Lebron Era (with all the great players today)

and in that middle of two roads Webb was overshadowed by Shaq...

So long and short is maybe he should, but do not think he will

azmo13
04-07-2008, 06:05 PM
And I find it rather odd that people, who say they know anything about basketball, would consider him not being a hall of famer.
Just because "the majority" of people think something, does not make it correct, logical, or even remotely intelligent thinking. i.e. the Earth was aparantly flat at one point according to "the majority".
And are we not stating our opinions? In my opinion.......this shouldn't even be a discussion.

I never tried to make the case that 'because the majority thinks so, its true'. Such an argument is contained nowhere in my post. Maybe the point was to subtle for you. Focus on what was said. The point of bringing up the majority was to point out that, if the majority thinks so, at the VERY LEAST, it needs to be a topic of discussion. Not that it makes it true. In other words, to use your example, if the majority of people think the earth is flat, it probably ought to be a topic of discussion, regardless of its truth value.

Here's a good sign that he might not belong in the HOF: He's not going to be. Lol.

azmo13
04-07-2008, 06:11 PM
as far as the "if barkley's in CW is in" argument:

http://www.prosportsdaily.com/forums/showthread.php?t=208466

good luck with that one.

MassoDio
04-07-2008, 06:26 PM
I never tried to make the case that 'because the majority thinks so, its true'. Such an argument is contained nowhere in my post. Maybe the point was to subtle for you. Focus on what was said. The point of bringing up the majority was to point out that, if the majority thinks so, at the VERY LEAST, it needs to be a topic of discussion. Not that it makes it true. In other words, to use your example, if the majority of people think the earth is flat, it probably ought to be a topic of discussion, regardless of its truth value.

Here's a good sign that he might not belong in the HOF: He's not going to be. Lol.

No, it wasn't too subtle...maybe my point was too blatant for you...the fact is, that whether the "majority" which is so vague, and unsubstantiated, it's rediculous, I don't care. My "opinon" is that it shouldn't be a discussion. The numbers are pretty easily HOF numbers when you compare them to a lot of players already in the HOF. I agree with you that he probably won't make it. My opinion was merely, to me it's not even a question that he "should" be, since that was the title of the thread. And I also agree that he is not in Barkley's class. But neither are probably 75% of the PF already in the HOF.

azmo13
04-07-2008, 06:30 PM
"the fact is, that whether the "majority" which is so vague, and unsubstantiated, it's rediculous, I don't care."

ouch... I can't even understand that. "syntax error line 01". lol.

MassoDio
04-07-2008, 06:36 PM
"the fact is, that whether the "majority" which is so vague, and unsubstantiated, it's rediculous, I don't care."

ouch... I can't even understand that. "syntax error line 01". lol.

Yeah, I even confused myself after reading that again. lol

In other words, majority is speculative. Majority in who's opinion? Your's, other posters, ESPN, a poll of a 100 people on the street? By saying that the majority of the people think he doesn't belong, means nothing to me.
I was only saying that in my opinion, it should not be a topic of discussion when you look at the numbers. I was not aware that I had to actually say...In My Opinion, since I was the one stating it, I felt that was assumed.

But, :shrug:

And he is still no Barkley by any means.

azmo13
04-07-2008, 06:43 PM
Yeah, I even confused myself after reading that again. lol

In other words, majority is speculative. Majority in who's opinion? Your's, other posters, ESPN, a poll of a 100 people on the street? By saying that the majority of the people think he doesn't belong, means nothing to me.
I was only saying that in my opinion, it should not be a topic of discussion when you look at the numbers. I was not aware that I had to actually say...In My Opinion, since I was the one stating it, I felt that was assumed.

But, :shrug:

And he is still no Barkley by any means.

Okay.. fine. Then 'your opinion' is wrong. It needs to be discussed. Obviously you agree because you are discussing it.

MassoDio
04-07-2008, 07:12 PM
Okay.. fine. Then 'your opinion' is wrong. It needs to be discussed. Obviously you agree because you are discussing it.

LOL! What kind of logic is that? Just because it is being discussed, and I am participating, doesn't make it necessary. People discuss unecessary things ALL the time. Most of this website is just that. That was just a dumb statement.

kimchi'sworld
04-09-2008, 01:09 PM
Webber should be in the Hall of Fame. He was a high school, college and pro hoops standout. The only thing that could prevent him from going in is the voters turned off by his UofM money laundering scandal.

Webber was freaking scary and put up ridiculous #s during his heyday (99 - 03) he WAS in the same breath as KG, and Timmy at the time and his career #'s are pretty much similar to theirs, and also his team was favored to win the championship along with being a strong mvp canidate in 03 before the injury in the play-offs and many of the western conference teams like dallas (they we're up 3-1 before the injury), la, spurs breathed a sigh of relief over that .

Iodine
04-09-2008, 01:34 PM
C-Webb should be in the hall.

edison_yia
04-09-2008, 02:02 PM
just think about this..bil walton is in the hall fo famer..and obviosly webber is better than him..so if webber doesn't get in..then the nba is crap!
the guy was a great basketball player in colelge and the professional level...he is one of the best passing big man of all time..and he was one of the top power forward in his era..and his stats is pretty darn good too

azmo13
04-10-2008, 08:33 PM
LOL! What kind of logic is that? Just because it is being discussed, and I am participating, doesn't make it necessary. People discuss unecessary things ALL the time. Most of this website is just that. That was just a dumb statement.

No, a dumb statement is that bizarre crap you sputtered out earlier earlier. If this idea is SO stupid it's not worth discussing, you wouldn't bother discussing it unless you were just angry, needing of attention, or just plain weird. I supsect all three.

He doesn't deserve to get in and he won't get in. End of story. Someone please close this thread.

azmo13
04-10-2008, 08:39 PM
just think about this..bil walton is in the hall fo famer..and obviosly webber is better than him..so if webber doesn't get in..then the nba is crap!
the guy was a great basketball player in colelge and the professional level...he is one of the best passing big man of all time..and he was one of the top power forward in his era..and his stats is pretty darn good too

You can say whatever you want about Walton, but he was the centerpiece of a team that won a ring. That's a HUGE criteria for HOF induction that CW doesn't have going for him.

Instead of all these completely unsupported claims, I'd like someone to try and provide a list of HOF PFs that never won a ring that CW is as good as or better than. I'm sure it's not a coincidence that no one has tried.

Brotherly Love
04-10-2008, 09:27 PM
Chris Webber belongs to the HOF stats wise but he's far from being a lock since there are many criterias he doesn't match (nba ring, college title, MVP title) ...

MassoDio
04-11-2008, 12:30 PM
No, a dumb statement is that bizarre crap you sputtered out earlier earlier. If this idea is SO stupid it's not worth discussing, you wouldn't bother discussing it unless you were just angry, needing of attention, or just plain weird. I supsect all three.

He doesn't deserve to get in and he won't get in. End of story. Someone please close this thread.

:clap: My word, you are a genius.

You yourself are discussing things that have no bearing on anything, hence being pointless, and not worth discussing. Your arguement is ill thought out and rediculous. But it's ok. The good thing about pointless discussions, is that you don't have to agree, since they are pointless, and nothing will ever come of your, or my OPINION.

nastylikedwade
04-11-2008, 06:11 PM
Chris Webber shouldn't be in the hall of fame, but yet again if loud mouth Dick Vitale is in the hall of fame, so should manute bol. god damn the NBA. The chickens are coming home to rooooooooossssssssssssstttttt. Thanks Rev Wright!!

azmo13
04-14-2008, 06:19 PM
:clap: My word, you are a genius.

You yourself are discussing things that have no bearing on anything, hence being pointless, and not worth discussing. Your arguement is ill thought out and rediculous. But it's ok. The good thing about pointless discussions, is that you don't have to agree, since they are pointless, and nothing will ever come of your, or my OPINION.

No, I'm the one saying it IS worth discussing, remember? lol. I'm at least giving him that much credit (C-Webb, remember? this discussion is about him). It's hilarious when people make superfluous use of words like "hence" and "therefore" as if an argument magically appears when you use them. And I agree completely. Nothing will ever come of your opinion. Mine, however will have it's validity demonstrated when CW fails to ever be in the HOF.

CWEBB04z
09-26-2008, 05:58 PM
I think he will.

1.) Its not all about championships, its about the players impact. Webber impacted the Warriors, Kings, and Bullets teams. Since Webber left the Warriors, the Warriors went like 13 years without making the playoffs, The Bullets were a horrible team since trading Webber, and the Kings, once the worst team in the NBA, were the Greatest Show on Court, and Webber helped the Kings make the playoffs in consecutive seasons, something Mitch Richmond couldnt do.

2.) Without his Fab Five, NBA players would still be wearing short shorts.

3.) Webber made several gamewinning shots. Nuggets, Rockets, Lakers, and other teams, look them up on youtube or something.

4.) Webbers Kings would have made it to the Finals if not for those 30 free throw attempts by the Lakers in 2002 game 6.

5.) Webber was the centerpeice of the Kings winning teams, without Webber, the Kings would the at the bottom. Webber impacted the game, he deserves to be in.

JMan17
09-26-2008, 06:28 PM
lol so typical. a guy with his first post and uses it to bring back a topic from 5 months ago. people like him should be banned and topics like these should be closed :pity:

Beno7500
09-26-2008, 06:30 PM
Webber is definitely going into the HOF.

Lebron23
09-26-2008, 06:33 PM
He's a HOF, and the best player that ever played for the Sacramento Kings.

JMan17
09-26-2008, 06:35 PM
He's a HOF, and the best player that ever played for the Sacramento Kings.

i guess you never heard of a player named Oscar Robertson? :pity:

theuuord
09-26-2008, 06:42 PM
i guess you never heard of a player named Oscar Robertson? :pity:

When did Oscar Robertson play in Sacramento? :confused:

JMan17
09-26-2008, 06:54 PM
When did Oscar Robertson play in Sacramento? :confused:

are you kidding? most of his career man. the team was Cincinnati Royals in his times but in 1972 they moved and were bought and were then called Kansas City-Omaha Kings. Which later in the 84/85 season they moved and were bought again and then called as we all know today, THE SACRAMENTO KINGS!

In Oscar's last 3 years he was traded to the Bucks but beside those last 3, all of his career he was what we know now the kings

MoBASS
09-26-2008, 07:02 PM
lol so typical. a guy with his first post and uses it to bring back a topic from 5 months ago. people like him should be banned and topics like these should be closed :pity:

Maybe that was Webber himself, stating his case :rolleyes:

IversonIsKrazy
09-26-2008, 07:22 PM
2 be in tha HOF u have to be a GREAT. i wouldnt nessecarly say he was a great, no mvp, no award, no championship. i agree that he was good, but not HOF good. not HOF greatness.

mrblisterdundee
09-26-2008, 07:47 PM
He should be in the hall of fame because he represents the greatest player ever to play for Sacramento. Furthermore, he will always be the greatest from Sacremento, because they'll never do that well.

Hawkeye15
09-26-2008, 07:51 PM
He should go to the hall of fame. From college basketball to the NBA, he was a dominant big man. Best hands in traffic I have ever seen. He just came up short when it mattered most, but how many HOF's can we say that about?? A ton of them.

Lakersfan2483
09-27-2008, 01:58 AM
I believe that C. Webb should be in the Hall of Fame. He was a top player for yrs., although his playoff resume is not the greatest, his impact on the game was felt.

Lakersfan2483
09-27-2008, 01:59 AM
Look at Sacramento's record and team prior to C. Webb's arrival, he turned that franchise around.

Jonathan2323
09-27-2008, 02:00 AM
he was never great. He was good

DerekRE_3
09-27-2008, 02:09 AM
he was never great. He was good

Before he was hurt he and KG were considered to be on the same level. He was better than just good. He got 25 and 12 in his prime, with 2 blocks and 4 assists, he is one of the better passing PF's in NBA history.

Even after his knee injury, he put up 20 and 10 with the Sixers while he was basically hobbling around on 1 leg. You have to be pretty talented to do that.

23LBJCleBrowns
09-27-2008, 11:20 AM
He is a HOF IMO. I really think he had a great career, except for with the Pistons.

ertanozgur
09-27-2008, 11:34 AM
he shouldnt..he wasnt such a great player

Hometeamrivals
09-27-2008, 11:36 AM
You know this is a great thread and a tough question. They let Dantley in this year and Bill Walton is in so I would say yea

Hawkeye15
09-27-2008, 11:43 AM
You know this is a great thread and a tough question. They let Dantley in this year and Bill Walton is in so I would say yea

Dantley was awesome. Walton I question. He was a great college player, but really didn't do that much in the pro's after his first few years.

THE_FLASH_21
09-27-2008, 11:54 AM
It's gona be close!!! He never dominated a game... But was really good doh..

JIDsanity
09-27-2008, 11:56 AM
They also say that Vince Carter's probability of making the HOF at 94%...

he will whats your point

Lebron23
09-27-2008, 12:50 PM
He was a former MVP Candidate, and the Sacramento Kings became a powerhouse team, when they traded Mitch Richmond to the Washington Wizards, and acquired Chris Webber.

Just look at his personal stats, and career accomplishment he is a much better player than Amare Stoudemire and Dwight Howard during his prime because Webber is one of the best all around PF in the history of the NBA.

Sacramento Kings was the best team in the NBA in 2002, and thanks for the F*cking Refs for rigging the Games in the 2002 Western Conference Finals.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/w/webbech01.html

SpeeMN
09-27-2008, 01:26 PM
HE WOULD HAVE WON A CHAMPIONSHIP IF THE REFS WEREN'T ON THE LAKERS SIDE!!!! thats been proven that the refs were calling the game in favor of the lakers. If the Kings won it that year he would have been Finals MVP. ALSO, it was Webber Duncan and Garnett back around the millennium, they were the best PF in the league and anyone of them could have arguably been the best. All of them should be in the Hall of Fame.

Hawkeye15
09-27-2008, 01:54 PM
he will whats your point

Carter's numbers will get him in easy. He never lived up to his potential obviously, but he has been a steady 24 ppg his whole career.

dre1990
09-27-2008, 01:57 PM
he's a HOF in my book

NYMetros
09-27-2008, 01:59 PM
He just sneaks in for me. He had a great career and was one of the best players in the league during his prime.

Jah king
09-27-2008, 02:08 PM
One of only 5 guys to average 20/9/4 for his career.

Would've won a title if not for "THE straight-on 3" by Robert Horry (game 4 playoffs, down 2-1).

Personally I never liked the guy (partly because I'm a Lakers fan) but I have respect for him as a player.

NO NEVER... Hes allways been to cool to try 100%..Never gave it his all...Besides Moes never go to the Hall

mamba24
09-27-2008, 02:21 PM
no. simple as that... the kinda guy that goes into the HOF without a ring or needs to bee on the level of karl malone, john stockton, charles barkley, etc... webber never was on that level

JOSETHEALLSTAR
09-27-2008, 02:58 PM
Yes

AFlagRules
09-27-2008, 03:34 PM
I think Chris deserves to be in the HOF.

NYstateofMinD
09-27-2008, 07:24 PM
Well he is a great PF....was the leader of a very competitive Kings team in the early 2000's.