Is Ben Wallace going to get a HOF nod this year?

[Monkhouse]

Highly doubtful IMO.  He never broke 10 ppg in his career, barely shot over 40% from the line  and was never a threat on offense except for put backs and alley oops. 

Apart from being part of the Bad Boys teams which can cut both ways (yes, he got a ring but many basketball purists hold the personalities on that team and how they played with disdain--see the already mentioned Rodman as well as Laimbeer, neither who are in the HOF), there's nothing distinguishing him from say Kenneth Faried who has comparable rebounding and shot blocking stats on PER basis and much better other overall stats.  I don't think anyone would be pounding the table that Faried as HOF material even if the Nuggets were perennial contenders and won an NBA championship.

A few clarification:
Ben Wallace was not a member of the "Bad Boys" Pistons.  Dennis Rodman is, indeed, a member of the HOF.  One distinguishing difference between Ben Wallace and Kenneth Faried might be Wallace's 4 DPOY awards.  Another would be that Faried never broke 10 rpg in a season and Ben did it 8 times (6 times more than 12 rpg) including leading the league twice (once with >15),

Well, there were the Bad Boys of the 80's and 90's and then there were the Bad Boys Lite in the early 2000's when Wallace played with the likes of Rasheed and Ron Artest neither of whom would be confused with choir boys.    

Did not know Rodman made the HOF; good for him.  He didn't just guard and battle under the glass against centers he often matched up against the other teams' best offensive player.  Didn't he win something like 6 DPOY awards? 

I still think Faried is the closest example in terms of style of play comparison to Ben Wallace unless you can come up with someone else.

Do you think Wallace is HOF material?

Wow lol.

[Tr1boy]

Absolutely not

[RJ87]

Highly doubtful IMO.  He never broke 10 ppg in his career, barely shot over 40% from the line  and was never a threat on offense except for put backs and alley oops. 

Apart from being part of the Bad Boys teams which can cut both ways (yes, he got a ring but many basketball purists hold the personalities on that team and how they played with disdain--see the already mentioned Rodman as well as Laimbeer, neither who are in the HOF), there's nothing distinguishing him from say Kenneth Faried who has comparable rebounding and shot blocking stats on PER basis and much better other overall stats.  I don't think anyone would be pounding the table that Faried as HOF material even if the Nuggets were perennial contenders and won an NBA championship.

Yeah that’s a good comparison, including the NBA-record 4 DPoY awards, 4 all-star appearances, 5 All-NBA appearances, and 6 All-Defensive appearances they both have.


It’s really just the Pistons success (that he had little to do with) that separates a player like Ben Wallace from Kenneth Faried.

That is just incredibly false. He was very important to that teams success, and comparing him to Faried is laughable, I am sorry.

He is one of the best defensive and rebounding centers in league history, and anchored that unit.

Agree completely with this, I really can't stop laughing at that previous post.

Saying they didn't need Ben is like saying the Bad Boy Piston team didn't need Isiah.

You guys are really missing GreenEnvy's sarcasm.

[wayupnorth]

Highly doubtful IMO.  He never broke 10 ppg in his career, barely shot over 40% from the line  and was never a threat on offense except for put backs and alley oops. 

Apart from being part of the Bad Boys teams which can cut both ways (yes, he got a ring but many basketball purists hold the personalities on that team and how they played with disdain--see the already mentioned Rodman as well as Laimbeer, neither who are in the HOF), there's nothing distinguishing him from say Kenneth Faried who has comparable rebounding and shot blocking stats on PER basis and much better other overall stats.  I don't think anyone would be pounding the table that Faried as HOF material even if the Nuggets were perennial contenders and won an NBA championship.

Yeah that’s a good comparison, including the NBA-record 4 DPoY awards, 4 all-star appearances, 5 All-NBA appearances, and 6 All-Defensive appearances they both have.


It’s really just the Pistons success (that he had little to do with) that separates a player like Ben Wallace from Kenneth Faried.

That is just incredibly false. He was very important to that teams success, and comparing him to Faried is laughable, I am sorry.

He is one of the best defensive and rebounding centers in league history, and anchored that unit.

Agree completely with this, I really can't stop laughing at that previous post.

Saying they didn't need Ben is like saying the Bad Boy Piston team didn't need Isiah.

You guys are really missing GreenEnvy's sarcasm.

I hope that is the case!

Though after re-reading it with that lens, I think you are correct.

[OldSchoolDude]

I think it would be great if he got in.   I remember a few years back there was a big discussion/debate on how to build a team to win an NBA championship.  Since the league has shifted from a dynamic duo approach to a big three, I think they were discussing weather you could still win with only two stars or if it had to be a big three.  Also, the duo or big three all had to be HoF caliber players.  The interesting caveat at the time was that Piston's championship team didn't have any super starts, so no dynamic duo or big three.  But now with Wallace and Chauncey Billups up for the HoF it seems that, that Piston team did in fact have at the least a dynamic duo and possibly a big three because in that discussion Rasheed Wallace and Tayshaun Prince were considered to be the more star like players on that team.

[Amonkey]

I think Big Ben was a unique player that is hard to compare to in today's NBA. The closest I see is really Tyson Chandler. He was a rebounding machine that could block and had a nonstop motor. He affected the game because players were literally scared of going to the paint because of him. In today's NBA, all you need is the 5 to hang in the 3 point line and since they can hit them, that would force him out. But back in the day, he would affect the gameplay of opposing offense. I do think he deserves it based on the way he played and his role in the game at that time.

[More Banners]

I think Big Ben was a unique player that is hard to compare to in today's NBA. The closest I see is really Tyson Chandler. He was a rebounding machine that could block and had a nonstop motor. He affected the game because players were literally scared of going to the paint because of him. In today's NBA, all you need is the 5 to hang in the 3 point line and since they can hit them, that would force him out. But back in the day, he would affect the gameplay of opposing offense. I do think he deserves it based on the way he played and his role in the game at that time.

Not unlike Rodman also.  Defender and rebound machine, zero offense.

Bigs used to stretch the floor with jumpers, if not 3's. Kareem could skyhook from anywhere, Parrish had the rainbow jumper, Liambeer could shoot from 18 feet.  It opened it up a little bit.

[Big333223]

I think it would be great if he got in.   I remember a few years back there was a big discussion/debate on how to build a team to win an NBA championship.  Since the league has shifted from a dynamic duo approach to a big three, I think they were discussing weather you could still win with only two stars or if it had to be a big three.  Also, the duo or big three all had to be HoF caliber players.  The interesting caveat at the time was that Piston's championship team didn't have any super starts, so no dynamic duo or big three.  But now with Wallace and Chauncey Billups up for the HoF it seems that, that Piston team did in fact have at the least a dynamic duo and possibly a big three because in that discussion Rasheed Wallace and Tayshaun Prince were considered to be the more star like players on that team.

I think there's some chicken/egg stuff when people talk about hall of famers and championships. Like, they say you need to have HoFers to win a championship but then the HoF voters will let in players, seemingly because they won a championship.

Billups will be a prime example if he gets in. I don't think he was a HoFer at all but he gets consideration because of that championship.

[More Banners]

I think it would be great if he got in.   I remember a few years back there was a big discussion/debate on how to build a team to win an NBA championship.  Since the league has shifted from a dynamic duo approach to a big three, I think they were discussing weather you could still win with only two stars or if it had to be a big three.  Also, the duo or big three all had to be HoF caliber players.  The interesting caveat at the time was that Piston's championship team didn't have any super starts, so no dynamic duo or big three.  But now with Wallace and Chauncey Billups up for the HoF it seems that, that Piston team did in fact have at the least a dynamic duo and possibly a big three because in that discussion Rasheed Wallace and Tayshaun Prince were considered to be the more star like players on that team.

I think there's some chicken/egg stuff when people talk about hall of famers and championships. Like, they say you need to have HoFers to win a championship but then the HoF voters will let in players, seemingly because they won a championship.

Billups will be a prime example if he gets in. I don't think he was a HoFer at all but he gets consideration because of that championship.

Billups had the nickname too.  Agree though. He wouldn't even have been an allstar without the team's success. On a bad team, he doesn't get the nod. Or title. Or HOF. Same with Wallace. Should just induct the team.

[Big333223]

I think it would be great if he got in.   I remember a few years back there was a big discussion/debate on how to build a team to win an NBA championship.  Since the league has shifted from a dynamic duo approach to a big three, I think they were discussing weather you could still win with only two stars or if it had to be a big three.  Also, the duo or big three all had to be HoF caliber players.  The interesting caveat at the time was that Piston's championship team didn't have any super starts, so no dynamic duo or big three.  But now with Wallace and Chauncey Billups up for the HoF it seems that, that Piston team did in fact have at the least a dynamic duo and possibly a big three because in that discussion Rasheed Wallace and Tayshaun Prince were considered to be the more star like players on that team.

I think there's some chicken/egg stuff when people talk about hall of famers and championships. Like, they say you need to have HoFers to win a championship but then the HoF voters will let in players, seemingly because they won a championship.

Billups will be a prime example if he gets in. I don't think he was a HoFer at all but he gets consideration because of that championship.

Billups had the nickname too.  Agree though. He wouldn't even have been an allstar without the team's success. On a bad team, he doesn't get the nod. Or title. Or HOF. Same with Wallace. Should just induct the team.

Wallace is different, to me. Wallace was an all time great defender, Billups wasn't great at anything. He was very good at a lot of things and a very good player but just not a great one. Wallace was the best defender of his generation. Billups wasn't the anything of his generation.

For me, being the best defender in the entire league 4 times makes you a no-brainer HoFer.

[Neurotic Guy]

I think it would be great if he got in.   I remember a few years back there was a big discussion/debate on how to build a team to win an NBA championship.  Since the league has shifted from a dynamic duo approach to a big three, I think they were discussing weather you could still win with only two stars or if it had to be a big three.  Also, the duo or big three all had to be HoF caliber players.  The interesting caveat at the time was that Piston's championship team didn't have any super starts, so no dynamic duo or big three.  But now with Wallace and Chauncey Billups up for the HoF it seems that, that Piston team did in fact have at the least a dynamic duo and possibly a big three because in that discussion Rasheed Wallace and Tayshaun Prince were considered to be the more star like players on that team.

I think there's some chicken/egg stuff when people talk about hall of famers and championships. Like, they say you need to have HoFers to win a championship but then the HoF voters will let in players, seemingly because they won a championship.

Billups will be a prime example if he gets in. I don't think he was a HoFer at all but he gets consideration because of that championship.

Billups had the nickname too.  Agree though. He wouldn't even have been an allstar without the team's success. On a bad team, he doesn't get the nod. Or title. Or HOF. Same with Wallace. Should just induct the team.

Wallace is different, to me. Wallace was an all time great defender, Billups wasn't great at anything. He was very good at a lot of things and a very good player but just not a great one. Wallace was the best defender of his generation. Billups wasn't the anything of his generation.

For me, being the best defender in the entire league 4 times makes you a no-brainer HoFer.

If HOF is supposed to tell the story of basketball, citing in particular those who had significant impact on the game in their era, Wallace definitely deserves strong consideration. He not only impacted games on the defensive end better than any other player in the league at least throughout 4 seasons (I realize DPOY is a subjective measure, but as one objective measure he led the league in Defensive plus/minus from 2000 to 2007 and is the all-time career leader) he also led the league in rebounding twice (8 times over 10 per game).   

A HOF comparison to an offensive player who made it, JoJo White: 7 seasons of 18+ ppg (twice over 20), 7 ASG appearances; 3 All-NBA teams.   Some may feel his accomplishments don't qualify him -- and JoJo was a better defensive player than Wallace was an offensive player -- but I think they are in a similar qualifications ballpark. 

[Moranis]

Ben Wallace is a HOFer though not such a surefire one that he is guaranteed to get in in his first year.

[ETNCeltics]

Not if he needed my vote. He was an elite defender, but only for a 4 or 5 year period.

He had no offensive game, and fact is, ability to score is far more important than being a great defender. Being a total liability with the ball in your hands is too much of a negative to overlook.

[KGs Knee]

My guess is Ben Wallace will get in, eventually. Especially considering all the other players elected who didn't deserve to be.

I wouldn't put him in there, his peak was too short, and the non-peak years weren't anywhere near good enough.

It's not the Hall of Very Good, it's the Hall of Fame. It should be for only the best of the best.   And Wallace was not the best of the best for a long enough period of time.

[Moranis]

7 straight years of at least 10.7 rpg and 2 bpg.  That is a pretty good peak time.  3 top 10 MVP vote finishes.  Currently 13th all time in total blocks (well at least since they started keeping the stat).  12th all time in TRB%.