I love this site http://www.basketballreference.com/leaders/leadershof.htm which is not the definitive HOF site, but helps define a players career. Read the definitions of how they arrive at those point totals.

We got former knick Bernard King, Paul Westphal, and Spencer Haywood all meeting the point criteria but still knocking on the door. Also you have Artis Gilmore too!

Spencer and Bernard had up and down careers and at times brilliant. Emotionally Bernard the knick belongs but if you look at his career you see the inconsistancies of his younger troubled days and his more mature greatness but hampered by injury.

BK was neither an MVP nor his teams ever go to the finals so I doubt despite his point totals he goes. To a lesser degree you look at Adrian Dantly's career and he was a monster but fails to get much recognition as he was traded many times and was leading scoring on some very bad teams.

Spencer I think deserves as he was dominant for longer period and had to endure the hardship rule which paved the way for free agents. He was very much a pioneer. While his incredible performance as a 19 year old where he came from nowhere to dominate the world stage at the 1968 olympics is not a "Professional" event, he gets little cred for what he did. Spencer was an athletic freak whose game was unstoppable. Playing in Seattle during his prime was reason for his lack of superstar status at that time.

Paul Westphals years in Phx were incredible. He was often voted to the annual list of white players who could jump type list as he could often dunk in traffic not often seen by 6-4 white players! He could score!

Artis Gillmore I am not sure about either. I like the point totals to decide the more subjective type players and perhaps that should be the key. He never did anything great but he did play on the Kentucky team that won the 72 ABA championship on a team that would have done very well in the NBA. He played alongside dan issel!

BK is right on the line and while the knick in me says he should go in, his career really did not have enough consistancy to get him over the top and I understand why he is excluded. That that Dominque Wilkens is fully deserving in my book, but he did have longevity and stayed healthy. Bernards first few years were productive statistically but he was not on good teams and was a bit of a "troubled" player until he matured into the stone cold killer he was in a knick uniform.

Talk amung youselves on this slow Knick news day!

David Lee. And it's a crying shame that the Knicks haven't retired his jersey yet.

BK is like Don Mattingly. They had a few good seasons followed by a few great ones where they were as good as anybody in the game. Then they got hurt and while they could still play at a high level, it was nowhere near the top of their game.

I think Spencer, Gilmore and Westphal all fall just short.

Posted by Nalod:


I love this site http://www.basketballreference.com/leaders/leadershof.htm which is not the definitive HOF site, but helps define a players career. Read the definitions of how they arrive at those point totals.

We got former knick Bernard King, Paul Westphal, and Spencer Haywood all meeting the point criteria but still knocking on the door. Also you have Artis Gilmore too!

Spencer and Bernard had up and down careers and at times brilliant. Emotionally Bernard the knick belongs but if you look at his career you see the inconsistancies of his younger troubled days and his more mature greatness but hampered by injury.

BK was neither an MVP nor his teams ever go to the finals so I doubt despite his point totals he goes. To a lesser degree you look at Adrian Dantly's career and he was a monster but fails to get much recognition as he was traded many times and was leading scoring on some very bad teams.

Spencer I think deserves as he was dominant for longer period and had to endure the hardship rule which paved the way for free agents. He was very much a pioneer. While his incredible performance as a 19 year old where he came from nowhere to dominate the world stage at the 1968 olympics is not a "Professional" event, he gets little cred for what he did. Spencer was an athletic freak whose game was unstoppable. Playing in Seattle during his prime was reason for his lack of superstar status at that time.

Paul Westphals years in Phx were incredible. He was often voted to the annual list of white players who could jump type list as he could often dunk in traffic not often seen by 6-4 white players! He could score!

Artis Gillmore I am not sure about either. I like the point totals to decide the more subjective type players and perhaps that should be the key. He never did anything great but he did play on the Kentucky team that won the 72 ABA championship on a team that would have done very well in the NBA. He played alongside dan issel!

BK is right on the line and while the knick in me says he should go in, his career really did not have enough consistancy to get him over the top and I understand why he is excluded. That that Dominque Wilkens is fully deserving in my book, but he did have longevity and stayed healthy. Bernards first few years were productive statistically but he was not on good teams and was a bit of a "troubled" player until he matured into the stone cold killer he was in a knick uniform.

Talk amung youselves on this slow Knick news day!

Bernards career was hampered by one major injury. Without that injury, he would have been one of the greatest Knicks of all time. I watched him play and his energy, ability and ambition was one of the best I ever seen. Too bad they got rid of Cartwright and Bernie went down.