[轉錄][外絮] 讓我們來看看誰是未來名人堂成員？
※ [本文轉錄自 NBA 看板 #1De7QPZY ]
作者: cat0806 (Cater) 看板: NBA
標題: [外絮] 讓我們來看看誰是未來名人堂成員？
時間: Sat Apr 9 23:09:10 2011
Future Hall of Famers? Let the debating begin
註：這篇和 【#1Dd9XnOW [外絮] Vince Carter，下一站名人堂？】 是同一作者
作者所引用的名人堂指數皆來自BBR，並非作者自行杜撰：http://tinyurl.com/7x5hbw
(點進去後，神米真的是5.5%無誤......)
The names I’ve heard most often in the past 48 hours:
最近48小時內，我所聽到最多可能的名字如下：
‧ Chris Webber (Hall of Fame probability: 72.95 percent)
I was surprised when Scott Howard-Cooper of NBA.com told me that several NBA
insiders, including past Hall voters, couldn’t agree on Webber’s candidacy
when he spoke to them. A personal aside: For me, as long as a player hits a
minimum benchmark of longevity as an elite guy, I prioritize quality over
counting stats. Webber’s counting stats aren’t super-impressive; he
finished with “only” 17,182 points, just behind Jeff Malone, and he made “
only” five All-Star Games. The latter, of course, can be explained in part
by how crowded the power forward field has been in the Western Conference for
the past 15 years. Health was always an issue, and Webber was nearly done as
a star player by the time he turned 30.
There are also holes in C-Webb’s “clutch” résumé in both college and the
pros.
But in terms of quality? Webber was one of the game’s truly great all-around
players for a half-decade in Sacramento, and he was very good before he
arrived there via one of the best trades in recent league history. No big man
had quite the same all-around skill set, and none were more pleasing to
watch. Toss in the Fab Five cultural relevance, and Webber, to me, belongs —
even if he looked terrified of shooting down the stretch of this game.
Chris Webber (名人堂可能性：72.95%)
讓我驚訝的地方在於，NBA球探Scott Howard-Cooper告訴我，他與多位NBA內部人士
(當中有幾位是名人堂成員)討論的結果，Webber甚至連進入候選名單的資格都沒有。
在我看來，只要一名球員達到了作為優秀球員的最低職業生涯時間，我會優先考慮
他們的個人數據，作為進名人堂的標準。
Webber的生涯數據並非如此耀眼，生涯總得分僅17182分，僅次於Jeff Malone。
另外，只有5次入選全明星賽。當然這可以解讀成過去15年西部出了太多優秀的大前鋒。
健康也是其因素，30歲的Webber基本上已跟退休沒兩樣了。且在Webber的大學時期&
職業生涯裡也存在著缺陷。
但入選資格方面，當時的五年內，Webber在國王隊裡稱得上是真正全能的偉大球星之一。
透過近幾年最有價值的交易，Webber來到了國王，在交易前他出色得無法被取代，那時
沒有一個大個子可以像他那樣擁有全面的技術，也沒有人能像他那樣打出具觀賞性、
行雲流水般的比賽。密西根五虎之名深植人心。在我看來，Webber完全配得上名人堂
的榮譽，儘管他的投籃並不是那麼地完美。
‧ Mitch Richmond (HOF probability: 67.01 percent)
And now we turn to the guy at the other end of Sacramento’s Webber heist. If
borderline candidates Carter and Reggie Miller (more below) make it to
Springfield, Richmond would stand to take over as the highest-scoring player
outside the Hall. He ranks 39th all time with 20,497 points, and only four
guys scored more points during the 1990s. Richmond made six straight All-Star
Games, but he spent most of his career on so-so or poor teams and he was
never really a top-level player; his shooting was only decent, his Player
Efficiency Rating cracked 20 in just two seasons and the non-scoring parts of
his game topped out at league average. He’s going to have a tough time.
Mitch Richmond (名人堂可能性：67.01%)
再看看Webber名人堂路上另一個強勁對手，如果以Vince Carter和Reggie Miller為進入
名人堂的基準線的話，那麼Richmond將是非名人堂成員裡得分最高的，他以20479分排在
聯盟史上第39位。過去10年裡，能在得分超過他的只有4位。生涯6次入選明星賽，
但由於大部分時間皆待在中低層球隊，其實稱不上是頂級球員。投籃方面還算OK，效率值
只有兩個賽季低於20 ，比賽的非得分部分則超出了聯盟的平均值。
‧ Reggie Miller (HOF probability: 5.5 percent)
That probability figure is not at typo, and it is quite jarring; Richard
Hamilton scores better on Basketball-Reference’s scale. That’s in part
because Miller was a one-dimensional player who didn’t accumulate anything
other than points, never made a first- or second All-NBA team and was never
more than an average defender.
But Miller’s 25,279 points tie him with Rick Barry for 17th all time, and
guys who have scored that many points simply don’t get left out of the Hall
— at least historically. Miller obviously deserves extra credit for his
cold-blooded work in the clutch and perhaps for being one of the first
players to make a consistent weapon out of the three-point shot — something
the probability metric does not precisely take into account.
I suspect Miller will get in, sooner rather than later, but he’s an
interesting case.
Reggie Miller (名人堂可能性：5.5%)
不要懷疑你看到的數字，雖然足以令人目瞪口呆。相較之下，Richard Hamilton比Miller
進入名人堂的指數還高，因為Miller做為進攻的終結者，在比賽中除了得分更多之外，
基本上其他方面並沒突出的地方。且Miller從來也沒進過聯盟第一隊或第二隊，防守能力
也在聯盟平均水準之下。
但Miller生涯得分高達25279分，和Ricky Barry並列史上第17名。在場上扮演冷血的
狙擊手角色，以及始終維持高命中率的三分球武器，這都很難用標準去衡量，他應該
為這些能力得到相應的榮耀。我並不看好Miller能進名人堂，但他的事蹟將為後人所
傳頌不朽。
‧ Alonzo Mourning (HOF probability: 47.2 percent)
He has fewer points (14,311) than Rod Strickland, Allan Houston and Hersey
Hawkins! He logged more than 70 games just twice after he turned 26, injuries
ended his time as a star by the time he turned 30 and he always ranked below
at least a few guys on the league’s center totem pole.
But many forget how good this guy was in his prime. He topped the 20 mark in
PER in each of first eight seasons, logging a close-to-normal number of games
in each one, and his PER reached the mid-20s in 1998-99 and the following
season; he ranked in the league’s top four in that category in both of those
seasons. He was a monster on the offensive glass, and if he shot too often,
he at least shot pretty well. Mourning won the Defensive Player of the Year
award twice and ranks as one of the true greats on that end. Seven All-Star
appearances and a notable career at Georgetown will help. He’s going to get
a really close look.
Alonzo Mourning (名人堂可能性：47.2%)
Mourning生涯總得分14311，甚至還低於R.Strickland、A.Houston和H.Hawkins。
26歲後，單季出賽70場以上的只有2個賽季，30歲過後，傷病幾乎毀了他的職業生涯。
因為在聯盟中鋒排行榜上，他始終落後於那幾個球員。
很多人不會忘記巔峰時期的Mourning是多麼風光，個人數據總是排在聯盟前20，每個賽季
都能完整地打完所有比賽。98-99年和99-00年，Mourning場均得分來到了20以上，個人
得分排行連續兩年排在了聯盟前四，名副其實的禁區進攻怪物。如果他常投籃，估計
他的準頭不差。生涯兩次入選最佳防守球員，七次明星賽，由於喬治城大學的出色表現，
Mourning離名人堂越來越近了。
‧ Dikembe Mutombo (HOF probability: 32.8 percent)
If Dennis Rodman (HOF probability: 45.5 percent) can get in, Mutombo, an
immensely popular guy known for his wonderful charity work, is going to have
at least a decent case. He ranked among both the league’s top offensive and
defensive rebounders, won two rebounding titles and four Defensive Player of
the Year awards, and made eight All-Star teams. He was never much of an
offensive threat apart from tip-ins, but he knew his role and got to the line
a fair amount.
Dikembe Mutombo (名人堂可能性：32.8%)
如果Dennis Rodman (名人堂指數：45.5%，好吧，已經進了) 成功進入名人堂，那麼
Mutombo---這個因為慷慨的慈善事業而享有相當高人氣的球星進入名人堂的可能性也是
很可能的。他是聯盟中數一數二抓進攻&防守籃板的高手，兩次獲得賽季最高的場均籃板
數，4次當選聯盟最佳防守隊員，八次入選全明星賽。 他並不是進攻端的得分機器，而
他知道自己在比賽中的角色，努力完成自己的任務。
‧ Tracy McGrady (HOF probability: 66.98 percent)
McGrady has a bit of Gale Sayers thing going on. Injuries ended his time as
an All-Star before he turned 28, and he’s clearly never going to approach
that level again. But he had a five-year run where he was perhaps the game’s
most accomplished scorer/passer (pre-LeBron), peaking in 2002-03, when he
became one of the only players ever to crack the 30 barrier in PER. He
carried his offense while posting an absurdly low (downright Nowitzkian,
actually) turnover rate considering the circumstances. He shot too often, and
from too far away, but the guy produced offensively like few others ever have.
His work on the other end never approached such a high level, and McGrady
will be remembered just as much for his injuries, his (way overblown) playoff
failures and his admittedly shaky work ethic.
Tracy McGrady (名人堂可能性：66.98%)
T-MAC的經歷和Gale Sayers有類似的地方，當28歲時，傷病提前結束了他的全明星生涯，
再回回去到到原來的巔峰期了。在他最輝煌的五年中，他可能是聯盟中最出色的得分手和
助攻者（在LBJ出現之前），02-03年達到了個人生涯巔峰，那時的T-MAC場均得分超過了
30分。出色的得分能力，極低的失誤比。他遠距離投籃的次數相當多，但他進攻威脅力卻
是很少球員可以相提並論的。T-MAC的生涯注定無法成就輝煌，而他將因為傷病、失敗的
季後賽經歷以及消極的打球態度被世人所銘記。
‧ Grant Hill (HOF probability: 41.5 percent)
Hill was basically a LeBron-lite all-around star before severe ankle problems
put his career on hold and eventually transformed him into a nice
complementary player. But he has lasted in that role, and he could pass or
approach Magic Johnson, Webber and Chris Mullin in total points if he stays
healthy and plays another season or two. He’s become one of the league’s
most versatile defenders, and even if that versatility was borne from
necessity in defense-challenged Phoenix, Hill has pulled the role off well. He
’s well-liked, threw the most famous successful inbounds pass ever in the
greatest game of any kind I’ve ever watched and stands as an all-time great
college player. Another interesting case.
Grant Hill (名人堂可能性：41.5%)
在腳踝受傷之前，Hill是類似於LeBron James這樣的全能型球員，然而傷病最終讓他
不得不轉變成一名出色替補球員。現在他一直堅持著完成這個角色，這樣他很有可能在
總得分追上甚至超越Magic Johnson、C.Webber和Chris Mullin，但這一切都要在他保持
健康的前提並再打年的前提下。
他是聯盟中最全面的防守球員之一，他也會把這種角色繼續承擔下去，即使這種全面是
迫於防守能力不足的太陽隊所需要。作為球隊的聯結者，他曾經創造了一個最著名最成功
的傳球，這是我這麼多年在重要比賽中看到最精彩的一次傳球，同時他也是名偉大的大學
球員，而這是另一段有趣的故事了。
‧ Manu Ginobili (HOF probability: 13.5 percent)
Manu’s almost 34 and he hasn’t yet reached the 10,000-point level, so he’s
just not going to have the NBA résumé to make a realistic case. But he’s
worth at least a mention, given his international record with Argentina, his
crucial role on three championship teams and the fact that he has
consistently been one of the league’s best two-way players when healthy. He
just hasn’t been healthy enough, and that can torpedo your Hall chances when
you don’t enter the league until your mid-20s.
Manu Ginobili (名人堂可能性：13.5%)
已經快34歲的Manu，生涯總得分還沒有超過一萬分(9662)，所以這是個是他很難在NBA
史上留名的現實因素，卻又是一個不得不提的球員，他是阿根廷籃壇的歷史創造者，
在馬刺的三次冠軍中扮演著不可或缺的角色，健康的他還是聯盟裡最出色的側翼球員。
然而可惜的是他不能常保持健康，另外一點就是，如果25歲之前還沒有進入聯盟，那麼
這會大大降低你入選名人堂的可能性。
‧ Steve Nash (HOF probability: 39.6 percent)
He’s absolutely going to get in, given his two MVP awards, his status as
perhaps the greatest shooter ever and the fact that if you have a healthy
Steve Nash on your team, your offense will be guaranteed to rank among the
league’s best. But it’s interesting that his score on the
Basketball-Reference scale is so low, isn’t it? He suffers a bit from never
having won a title, and for never having been even an average defender for
his position – a position, it should be noted, that has been nearly
impossible to defend individually since the league banned hand-checking.
Still: Nash would tell you his defense has never been very good, and at its
worst, it has been a giant handicap in Phoenix, as the Suns constantly
scramble to find places Nash can hide.
Steve Nash (名人堂可能性：39.6%)
兩屆MVP的Steve Nash，毫無疑問地的將會入選。他很可能是至今最棒的射手，如果你的
隊伍中擁有健康的Nash，那麼隊伍的攻擊能力肯定是聯盟之冠。 但是他在總排名上如此
的低，這難道不有趣嗎？ 從來沒有拿過冠軍，這讓Nash處於劣勢。低於聯盟水平的防守
能力，也是一個關鍵點。 在聯盟禁止Hand-check之後，他幾乎防不住任何球員。Nash
不會告訴你，他的防守有多糟，但這正好是重要的一點，它成為了太陽前進的巨大障礙。
因此，太陽隊正千方百計地尋找一個彌補Nash防守漏洞的方法。
That’s the list, for now. Who else should be here, readers?
以上就是所有名單了，鄉民還想到誰？
http://goo.gl/IvNpx
--
神米會不會被瞧得太扁了......
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc)
◆ From: 118.160.143.172
推
04/09 23:11,
04/09 23:11
→
04/09 23:11,
04/09 23:11
推
04/09 23:12,
04/09 23:12
→
04/09 23:12,
04/09 23:12
推
04/09 23:12,
04/09 23:12
→
04/09 23:12,
04/09 23:12
→
04/09 23:13,
04/09 23:13
推
04/09 23:13,
04/09 23:13
推
04/09 23:13,
04/09 23:13
推
04/09 23:13,
04/09 23:13
推
04/09 23:13,
04/09 23:13
推
04/09 23:14,
04/09 23:14
推
04/09 23:14,
04/09 23:14
噓
04/09 23:15,
04/09 23:15
推
04/09 23:18,
04/09 23:18
推
04/09 23:18,
04/09 23:18
推
04/09 23:19,
04/09 23:19
推
04/09 23:19,
04/09 23:19
※ wadecp3:轉錄至看板 MiamiHeat 04/09 23:19
※ wadecp3:轉錄至看板 PHX-Suns 04/09 23:19
噓
04/09 23:19,
04/09 23:19
推
04/09 23:20,
04/09 23:20
推
04/09 23:20,
04/09 23:20
→
04/09 23:21,
04/09 23:21
推
04/09 23:21,
04/09 23:21
→
04/09 23:21,
04/09 23:21
噓
04/09 23:21,
04/09 23:21
推
04/09 23:21,
04/09 23:21
噓
04/09 23:22,
04/09 23:22
→
04/09 23:22,
04/09 23:22
噓
04/09 23:22,
04/09 23:22
→
04/09 23:23,
04/09 23:23
推
04/09 23:23,
04/09 23:23
→
04/09 23:24,
04/09 23:24
推
04/09 23:24,
04/09 23:24
噓
04/09 23:25,
04/09 23:25
→
04/09 23:25,
04/09 23:25
→
04/09 23:25,
04/09 23:25
→
04/09 23:25,
04/09 23:25
推
04/09 23:25,
04/09 23:25
還有 69 則推文
還有 2 段內文
→
04/10 01:20,
04/10 01:20
噓
04/10 01:23,
04/10 01:23
噓
04/10 01:34,
04/10 01:34
→
04/10 01:35,
04/10 01:35
推
04/10 01:38,
04/10 01:38
推
04/10 01:44,
04/10 01:44
噓
04/10 01:45,
04/10 01:45
推
04/10 01:46,
04/10 01:46
噓
04/10 01:48,
04/10 01:48
推
04/10 02:03,
04/10 02:03
推
04/10 02:04,
04/10 02:04
噓
04/10 02:05,
04/10 02:05
噓
04/10 02:05,
04/10 02:05
噓
04/10 02:12,
04/10 02:12
噓
04/10 02:22,
04/10 02:22
噓
04/10 02:25,
04/10 02:25
噓
04/10 02:41,
04/10 02:41
推
04/10 02:50,
04/10 02:50
→
04/10 03:02,
04/10 03:02
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc)
◆ From: 188.74.82.232
推
04/10 03:18, , 1F
04/10 03:18, 1F
推
04/10 03:35, , 2F
04/10 03:35, 2F
推
04/10 03:50, , 3F
04/10 03:50, 3F
推
04/10 08:51, , 4F
04/10 08:51, 4F
噓
04/10 08:56, , 5F
04/10 08:56, 5F
噓
04/10 10:17, , 6F
04/10 10:17, 6F
推
04/10 10:19, , 7F
04/10 10:19, 7F
推
04/10 10:55, , 8F
04/10 10:55, 8F
推
04/10 11:53, , 9F
04/10 11:53, 9F
噓
04/10 12:20, , 10F
04/10 12:20, 10F
→
04/10 13:15, , 11F
04/10 13:15, 11F
推
04/10 13:50, , 12F
04/10 13:50, 12F
噓
04/10 17:21, , 13F
04/10 17:21, 13F
推
04/10 18:49, , 14F
04/10 18:49, 14F
推
04/10 20:27, , 15F
04/10 20:27, 15F
噓
04/10 22:13, , 16F
04/10 22:13, 16F
噓
04/10 23:42, , 17F
04/10 23:42, 17F
推
04/11 07:02, , 18F
04/11 07:02, 18F
噓
04/11 07:33, , 19F
04/11 07:33, 19F
噓
04/12 23:25, , 20F
04/12 23:25, 20F