Mark Jackson deserves to be in the Hall of Fame

[hawkfan]

Mark Jackson deserves to be in the Hall of Fame.

Second all-time on assists list (soon to be passed by Jason Kidd, but will still be third).

Over 10,000 career assists.

Led the league once overall in assists.

Deserves to be elected to the Hall of Fame.

[snipes12]

http://www.spurgin.net/images/etc/attention_whore.jpg

[hawkfan]

http://www.spurgin.net/images/etc/attention_whore.jpg

You're talking about yourself and not the substance of this thread.

[snipes12]

http://www.spurgin.net/images/etc/attention_whore.jpg

so the substance of this thread is this?

[hawkfan]

The substance of the thread is whether Mark Jackson deserves to be in the Hall of Fame.

I think he does.

Do you agree or disagree?

[White Chocolate]

The substance of the thread is whether Mark Jackson deserves to be in the Hall of Fame.

I think he does.

Do you agree or disagree?


Disagree. His longevity makes him look better than he really is. During his prime, he was a good playmaker, decent defender though not much of a scorer, not a good shooter, only has 1 All-Star appearance, and no other real accolades.

[hawkfan]

Disagree. His longevity makes him look better than he really is. During his prime, he was a good playmaker, decent defender though not much of a scorer, not a good shooter, only has 1 All-Star appearance, and no other real accolades.

1. Longetivity means he was able to stay in shape. He wouldn't have run up those numbers if his skills had diminished. He had luck that he didn't get injured, but there is something for maintaining personal game shape that some players refuse to do (Sean Kemp, Antoine Walker, amongst others).
2. Number 2 on the all time assists list. Guys with less assists than him are in.
3. Stockton never dominated a season, but he was always consistently excellent. Jackson wasn't as good as Stockton, but he was always consistently an excellent passer.

[L.Kizzle]

1. Longetivity means he was able to stay in shape. He wouldn't have run up those numbers if his skills had diminished. He had luck that he didn't get injured, but there is something for maintaining personal game shape that some players refuse to do (Sean Kemp, Antoine Walker, amongst others).
2. Number 2 on the all time assists list. Guys with less assists than him are in.
3. Stockton never dominated a season, but he was always consistently excellent. Jackson wasn't as good as Stockton, but he was always consistently an excellent passer.
I feel you, Magic, Isiah Thomas and Oscar are no good, he passed them up.

Mark will not get in. Was he ever a top 5, let alone top ten PG in any season??

[White Chocolate]

1. Longetivity means he was able to stay in shape. He wouldn't have run up those numbers if his skills had diminished. He had luck that he didn't get injured, but there is something for maintaining personal game shape that some players refuse to do (Sean Kemp, Antoine Walker, amongst others).


Longevity is good, but it doesn't mean you're going to the HOF if you can play for 15+ years.



2. Number 2 on the all time assists list. Guys with less assists than him are in.


Also remember he played for 17 seasons. He averaged 8 a game for his career, but he didn't dominate games like other HOF's.



3. Stockton never dominated a season, but he was always consistently excellent. Jackson wasn't as good as Stockton, but he was always consistently an excellent passer.


Never dominated a season? He led the league in APG 9x. He averaged 14+ 2x and 13+ 5x. He also averaged 3+ SPG 3x. Stockton also shot 50%+ from the field 12x. Just because you're an excellent passer on a regular basis, doesn't mean you're a HOF. There are other qualities needed to become a HOF.

[hawkfan]

I feel you, Magic, Isiah Thomas and Oscar are no good, he passed them up.

Mark will not get in. Was he ever a top 5, let alone top ten PG in any season??

Magic, Isiah and Oscar are terrific.

I wasn't knocking them.

I was showing how good his accomplishments were.

[hawkfan]

Mark Jackson was also Rookie of the Year.

[White Chocolate]

Magic, Isiah and Oscar are terrific.

I wasn't knocking them.

I was showing how good his accomplishments were.


Mark's accomplishments were good. He focused on his main strength(playmaking) and made a career out of it. Unfortunately, he didn't do much else and has nothing to show for it.

[White Chocolate]

Mark Jackson was also Rookie of the Year.


So was Mike Miller. It means you were the best freshman in the league. It doesn't mean you're going to have a great career.

[Human Error]

The substance of the thread is whether Mark Jackson deserves to be in the Hall of Fame.

I think he does.

Do you agree or disagree?
No.

If he deserves, then we also have to induct Tim Hardaway, Mark Price, Terrell Brandon, Sam Cassell, Nick Van Exel, Mahmoud Abdul-Rauf, Michael Adams, Derek Harper, Mookie Blaylock as well.

Mark Jackson had a long good career but there were always 12~15 better point guards in the league than him, and even at his very peak he was barely a top 10 point guard in the NBA. You have to remember that Hall of Fame is for elite players, not good players.

You post a lot and I like your enthusiasm but there's a reason why majority of ISH posters think you have to be banned. You just aren't very capable intellectually, and your posts make people shake head in disgust. Please do not post until you learn more about the game.

[Stringer Bell]

:lol

No.

[AkronAngel]

That gives him a case, but I wouldn't put him in it. I think the HOF is a little to relaxed as it is.

[bizil]

One thing that REALLY hurts Mark is the fact that his peak value wasn't HOF quality. If your peak value was never HOF quality then it's hard to build an argument. His solo accolades are lacking as well. One All Star game, Rookie of the Year, and an assists title isn't HOF quality.

Plus he never won any rings. Sure he's fourth all time in assists and was a great passer. But guys like Stockton and Kidd were that AND SO MUCH MORE! Plus they had IMPECCABLE solo accolades. Guys with injuries issues like a T-Mac or a Grant Hill deserve a look before Jackson does. He was VERY GOOD for a long time. But NEVER great!

[bizil]

I heard some people say if Mutumbo and Rodman are in the HOF then Mark should be in. And NOTHING could be further from the truth! Rodman is arguably the best rebounding and defensive forward of all time. Plus Rodman has FIVE RINGS! Despite Rodman's shortcomings as a scorer, his resume is EASILY HOF SHIT!

Mutumbo was a four time defensive player of the year. And he's arguably the best interior defender of all time. And he's also made multiple All NBA Teams. To top it off, Deke played in the last great era for centers in the NBA and made an impact. So once again, Deke's resume is EASILY HOF! Jackson's resume PALES in comparison!

[sp6r=underrated]

I can't create topics so I'll post this here. Why isn't Popovich in the HOF?

Popovich has been eligible for induction for many years. His accomplishments crush most of the coaches who get inducted every year. Compare Popovich's resume to Calipari. Is there anyone who thinks Calipari is more accomplished?

The basketball HOF is a complete joke. It is the only HOF where coaching in the minor leagues is considered more impressive than the big leagues. It is far past time for the NBA to ditch the HOF and create its own HOF which only considers the NBA and ABA since the league merged into the NBA.

___________________________________________

Mark Jackson is a lulzy choice for the HOF. He was the Andre Miller of his era.

[97 bulls]

I can see why a person would say he should be. I mean, theres three main statistical categories in the NBA. Points, Rebounds, and Assists. Hes number two in one of those, thats a huge accomplishment. Or is passing not very important?

[Akrazotile]

He should be in the broadcasting HOF, strikly 4 the L.U.L.Z.

[warriorfan]

No.

If he deserves, then we also have to induct Tim Hardaway, Mark Price, Terrell Brandon, Sam Cassell, Nick Van Exel, Mahmoud Abdul-Rauf, Michael Adams, Derek Harper, Mookie Blaylock as well.

Mark Jackson had a long good career but there were always 12~15 better point guards in the league than him, and even at his very peak he was barely a top 10 point guard in the NBA. You have to remember that Hall of Fame is for elite players, not good players.

You post a lot and I like your enthusiasm but there's a reason why majority of ISH posters think you have to be banned. You just aren't very capable intellectually, and your posts make people shake head in disgust. Please do not post until you learn more about the game.


some old school evisceration right here

[bizil]

I can see why a person would say he should be. I mean, theres three main statistical categories in the NBA. Points, Rebounds, and Assists. Hes number two in one of those, thats a huge accomplishment. Or is passing not very important?

I can see why some would say he's HOF caliber because of his assists numbers. However he dropped to 4th all time in assists. Kidd and Nash passed him up. But his solo accolades aren't HOF caliber at all. His peak value isn't HOF caliber either. And he never won any rings. So if u don't have ANY of those things, then I don't see u as an HOFer.

[KNOW1EDGE]

Disagree

Hall of famers are supposed to be the best of the best at their position.

Mark Jackson was never anything more than a solid pg.
solid point guards don't deserve to be in the hall of fame.
just appreciate what he did and let it be.

[L.Kizzle]

He doesn't have a shot.

Was he even a top ten PG in his era?

Magic
Thomas
Stockton
Payton
KJ
Hardaway x2
Price
Porter
Kidd

And these are just from the first half of his career.

Even his best season the year he made his only All-Star team (89), he wasn't even a top five PG in the league.

Magic
Zeke
Stockton
KJ
Price
Terry Porter

Also you had the two headed monster in Denver of Fat Lever (20/8/9) and Michael Adams (18/4/4.) Which ever one was the PG, is over Mark. Well, I guess Adams is debatable. Derek Harper at 17/7 down in Dallas.
Hell, his NYC buddy Ken-NY put up 17 and 8 that season.