PDA

View Full Version : Billups: HOF?



JasonJohnHorn
09-12-2014, 10:46 PM
Seriously? Nobody posted this yet? It thought this was a PSD tradition? Anytime a player retires we ask if he's headed for the HOF?


I'd say the obvious answer is yes. But I've heard some disagree with me.

ManningToTyree
09-12-2014, 10:51 PM
He's borderline to me and probably lean towards no. I think he will get in however

jaydubb
09-13-2014, 12:22 AM
He was a great player, nba finals MVP, 5 time all star, I just don't think he's good enough to be in the hall of fame personally..

However, with how many actually do get into the NBA hall of fame, I'd be willing to bet he does get in some day.

abe_froman
09-13-2014, 12:53 AM
1x ring
1x f.mvp
5x all star
3x all nbaer
2x all d teams

not the strongest candidate,but the resume is better than some hofers ...so yeah,he should def get in.

Chronz
09-13-2014, 03:37 AM
Baseball has this nice little method to summarize a players candidacy, called the Keltner List. I've translated the bullet points to basketball jargon. I answered the ones that were no brainers, have to really think about the undecided ones.





1. Was he ever regarded as the best player in basketball?
No.

2. Was he the best player on his team?
At different points in his career, you could argue he was.

3. Was he the best player in the League at his position?
Probably not. He was in the conversation maybe once in his career.

4. Did he make an impact on a Championship winner.
Yes. He was its Finals MVP.

5. Was he a good enough player that he could continue to play regularly after passing his prime?
Not sure how to answer this one, the guy definitely tried, but injuries eventually mounted.

6. Is he the very best player in baseball history who is not in the Hall of Fame?
Debatable.

7. Are most players who have comparable career statistics in the Hall of Fame?
Unsure.

8. Do the player's numbers meet Hall of Fame standards?
Thats a yes in my book.

9. Is there any evidence to suggest that the player was significantly better or worse than is suggested by his statistics?
He had a Clutch Reputation and was a quality defender for a short while.

10. Is he the best player at his position who is eligible for the Hall of Fame but not in?
Likely so.

11. How many MVP-type seasons did he have? Did he ever win an MVP award? If not, how many times was he close?
He never really came close but he did have a decent 5th place showing once.

12. How many All-Star-type seasons did he have? How many All-Star games did he play in? Did most of the other players who played in this many go to the Hall of Fame?
He made 5 All-Star games but he had about 8 All-Star caliber seasons. On par with many HOF'ers.

13. If this man were the best player on his team, would it be likely that the team could win the pennant?
Its been proven that he could be one of its best players, he made the Conference Finals like 6 or 7 years in a row for 2 teams.

14. What impact did the player have on Basketball history? Was he responsible for any rule changes? Did he introduce any new equipment? Did he change the game in any way?
Not really, the defensive changes came about in part to restrict his teams dominance but that wasn't due to any 1 player. Not sure of Chauncey's impact, he wasn't overly popular nor flashy.

15. Did the player uphold the standards of sportsmanship and character that the Hall of Fame, in its written guidelines, instructs us to consider?
The man epitomized professionalism throughout most of his career.

mightybosstone
09-13-2014, 10:14 AM
I think he does get in. Kevin Johnson for me is the barometer by which I judge all other PGs on whether or not they should get in the Hall of Fame, as KJ is easily the best PG not in the Hall. KJ was clearly the more skilled passer and even a more prolific scorer than Billups. But Chauncey has him beat in pretty much every other area you could possibly judge a player. He was a far superior rebounder and shooter.

And they're pretty much on opposite ends of the spectrum on the defensive side of the ball where KJ was a sieve and Billups was considered elite for his position for most of his career. They're also pretty much on opposite ends of the spectrum in terms of playoff performance. KJ was known for hiding in big moments while Billups was known for thriving in them. I just think Billups has a far better resume than KJ was a the better overall player.

I'll remember Billups as being a super likable, jack of all trades point guard who did everything well, was the unquestioned leader of one of the best teams of the 2000s and who you never wanted to see with the ball in his hand against you at the end of games. If I had a vote, I'd put him in the Hall of Fame. But I definitely think he's a guy that could take a while and who a lot of people and voters will certainly be on the fence about.

nycericanguy
09-13-2014, 12:24 PM
I think he does get in. Kevin Johnson for me is the barometer by which I judge all other PGs on whether or not they should get in the Hall of Fame, as KJ is easily the best PG not in the Hall. KJ was clearly the more skilled passer and even a more prolific scorer than Billups. But Chauncey has him beat in pretty much every other area you could possibly judge a player. He was a far superior rebounder and shooter.

And they're pretty much on opposite ends of the spectrum on the defensive side of the ball where KJ was a sieve and Billups was considered elite for his position for most of his career. They're also pretty much on opposite ends of the spectrum in terms of playoff performance. KJ was known for hiding in big moments while Billups was known for thriving in them. I just think Billups has a far better resume than KJ was a the better overall player.

I'll remember Billups as being a super likable, jack of all trades point guard who did everything well, was the unquestioned leader of one of the best teams of the 2000s and who you never wanted to see with the ball in his hand against you at the end of games. If I had a vote, I'd put him in the Hall of Fame. But I definitely think he's a guy that could take a while and who a lot of people and voters will certainly be on the fence about.

KJ prime was a 20/12/4 50% player, and for his career 18/9/3.3 and nearly 50% shooter.

Billups was a better 3pt shooter, but in fairness the 3pt shot just wasn't used much in KJ's era. And Billups has a ,pretty worful 41% career shooting %.

KJ's last 2 seasons as a starter he actually started shooting more 3's and hit nearly 40% of them... that's when the league started moving toward more 3's.

So is CB really that much better a shooter? or did he just play in an era where guys shot a ton more 3's.

BKdoubleStacker
09-13-2014, 01:08 PM
Easy no for me

mightybosstone
09-13-2014, 03:54 PM
KJ prime was a 20/12/4 50% player
No sir. He posted those numbers for one season in his entire career. He was more like a 20/10/3 guy in his prime.


Billups was a better 3pt shooter, but in fairness the 3pt shot just wasn't used much in KJ's era.
Just because it wasn't nearly as prominent in the 90s than it was in the 2000s, doesn't excuse somebody for being terrible at it.


And Billups has a ,pretty worful 41% career shooting %.
FG% is a pretty archaic way to judge a player's overall scoring efficiency. When you combine Billups' excellent numbers from the 3-point line and the free throw line, his 58% carer TS% is only slightly lower than KJ's 58.5% career TS%.


So is CB really that much better a shooter? or did he just play in an era where guys shot a ton more 3's.
Yes, Billups was a better shooter and I'm not sure how you can prove otherwise. I don't buy that playing in an era where the 3-pointer wasn't as prominent excuses you from being a ****** shooter. I just pulled up the list of the players who attempted the most 3-point attempts in a season and five of the top 10 seasons of all-time were from players in the 90s.

Just for fun, I looked up the average 3-point attempts by a team from 94-95 to 04-05 and you'd be shocked how little a difference that decade makes. The average team in 95 shot 1,255 3-point attempts in a season and made 35.9% of them. The average team in 05 attempted 1,292 3-pointers and made 35.6% of them. So KJ shooting 15% from the 3-point line that season had absoultely nothing to do with league trends. He was just one of those guys who happened to improve his 3-point later in his career unlike Billups, who was a great 3-point shooter pretty much his entire career.

But frankly, to even suggest that KJ might have been as good a shooter as Billups is just totally asinine. KJ made 160 3-pointers in his entire career and Billups topped that in a single season three times. KJ had two seasons of shooting 36% or better from the 3-point line, while Billups did that 13 times, including 10 seasons of 38% or better. Hell, Billups is 6th in career 3-pointers made and 6th in career postseason 3-pointers. You could make a strong case for him being one of the 10-20 greatest 3-point shooters in NBA history.

nycericanguy
09-14-2014, 09:29 AM
No sir. He posted those numbers for one season in his entire career. He was more like a 20/10/3 guy in his prime.


Just because it wasn't nearly as prominent in the 90s than it was in the 2000s, doesn't excuse somebody for being terrible at it.


FG% is a pretty archaic way to judge a player's overall scoring efficiency. When you combine Billups' excellent numbers from the 3-point line and the free throw line, his 58% carer TS% is only slightly lower than KJ's 58.5% career TS%.


Yes, Billups was a better shooter and I'm not sure how you can prove otherwise. I don't buy that playing in an era where the 3-pointer wasn't as prominent excuses you from being a ****** shooter. I just pulled up the list of the players who attempted the most 3-point attempts in a season and five of the top 10 seasons of all-time were from players in the 90s.

Just for fun, I looked up the average 3-point attempts by a team from 94-95 to 04-05 and you'd be shocked how little a difference that decade makes. The average team in 95 shot 1,255 3-point attempts in a season and made 35.9% of them. The average team in 05 attempted 1,292 3-pointers and made 35.6% of them. So KJ shooting 15% from the 3-point line that season had absoultely nothing to do with league trends. He was just one of those guys who happened to improve his 3-point later in his career unlike Billups, who was a great 3-point shooter pretty much his entire career.

But frankly, to even suggest that KJ might have been as good a shooter as Billups is just totally asinine. KJ made 160 3-pointers in his entire career and Billups topped that in a single season three times. KJ had two seasons of shooting 36% or better from the 3-point line, while Billups did that 13 times, including 10 seasons of 38% or better. Hell, Billups is 6th in career 3-pointers made and 6th in career postseason 3-pointers. You could make a strong case for him being one of the 10-20 greatest 3-point shooters in NBA history.

wasn't suggesting he was as good a shooter... but we're talking about a guy that attempted a 3 pointer once every 2 games... so to me his 3pt % doesn't hold much weight, just as a guy that shot 45% from 3 but only made 1 three every 2 or 3 games wouldn't hold much weight either.

KJ was also an excellent FT shooter, so CB just wins on 3pt shooting.

IT's hard to compare ERA's... if KJ played in todays era he would have shot and made more 3's... evidenced by his last couple of seasons where his attempts and % skyrocketed.

Let me ask you something, do guys today generally have higher TS% and eFG% percentages than guys in the 90's?

mightybosstone
09-14-2014, 10:13 AM
wasn't suggesting he was as good a shooter... but we're talking about a guy that attempted a 3 pointer once every 2 games... so to me his 3pt % doesn't hold much weight, just as a guy that shot 45% from 3 but only made 1 three every 2 or 3 games wouldn't hold much weight either.
Yes, and he wasn't attempting three-pointers back then because he wasn't a good 3-point shooter. It had very little to do with the era he played in. Look at someone like Bird. Bird is regularly considered to be one of the greatest shooters of all-time, but he only took 2-3 3-pointers a game at his peak. That's nothing by today's standards. But just because the shot wasn't as prominent didn't prevent Bird from taking it and making a high percentage.


KJ was also an excellent FT shooter, so CB just wins on 3pt shooting.
:confused: You'll have to explain that one to me. Billups wasn't just an excellent free throw shooter. He is/was one of the greatest free throw shooters in NBA history. The guy averaged 89.4% on his free throws in his career, good enough for the fourth highest percentage in the history of the NBA. KJ shot 84.1%, which is still very good, but that 5% difference is everything.

This is such a terrible argument. That's like saying "Carmelo Anthony is also an excellent offensive player, so Lebron is just better on defense." It takes no context or statistical data into consideration whatsoever.


IT's hard to compare ERA's... if KJ played in todays era he would have shot and made more 3's... evidenced by his last couple of seasons where his attempts and % skyrocketed.
Okay, let me ask you this. Why did Jason Kidd suck so much as a 3-point shooter in the late 90s and early 2000s and then suddenly become an excellent 3-point shooter later in his career? The 3-point shot was already prominent by the time Kidd hit his prime and the guy still took 3-4 3-pointers a game despite shooting 34% or less almost every season from 95-04. Then all of a sudden, he just started making them, shooting 35% or better in 7 of his last 9 seasons and topping 38% three consecutive years.

For that matter, what about Melo? Or Iguodala? Or Lebron? Some guys just develop a 3-point shot later in their careers, especially once they start to lost their athleticism. It's not uncommon whatsoever.

You're also not taking sample size into consideration. The guy played 11 relatively full seasons in the league and shot better than 37% from the 3-point line one time. Aberrations happen in sports, especially when you're looking at one particular skill or stat over a single season. And sometimes guys vary greatly on 3-point shooting from season to season. Look at Rip Hamilton. In 06, Rip shot 45.8% from the 3-point line. The three seasons before that he shot 31% or worse and the season afterward, he shot 34%. And that was the first example I could find, but there are probably 100 guys who you could see similar variation with regarding 3-point shooting.

McGrady's another great example. In his ridiculous 02-03 season, he shot 38.6% from the 3-point line and was fifth in the league in 3-pointers made. He only shot better than 37% from the 3-point line once in his career among seasons where he attempted at least 50 3-pointers and he shot 34% or worse in 8 of those seasons.


Let me ask you something, do guys today generally have higher TS% and eFG% percentages than guys in the 90's?
What do you mean by "guys"? That's such a generic statement. In terms of most low post bigs, I would say "no" because there's really very little difference in terms of efficiency with big men today and 20 years ago. In terms of guards and stretch forwards, I would say "yes" because the 3-point shot has become more prominent. But a lot of that has to do with coaches and GMs recognizing the importance of efficiency and the value of the 3-pointer.

That being said, that has absolutely NO bearing on why KJ shot so poorly from the 3-point line. Don't blame an era for a player simply not being good at something that so many players were already good at within that era.

JWO35
09-14-2014, 10:31 AM
He's a borderline HOF IMO...I can see him getting in on a weak class

mrblisterdundee
09-14-2014, 01:44 PM
He was one of the best leaders ever, and that 2004 title was on a superstar-less team, which is quite an accomplishment in teamwork. Adding to his resume will be his career as a coach, although he seems to prefer coaching lower levels of competition. Hopefully he relents and takes a position with an NBA team, working his way up to head coach.

Hawkeye15
09-14-2014, 02:39 PM
he sneaks in, yes