Jump to content

Nominations open for Billikens HOF


Recommended Posts

Based on these criteria Brian Conklin and (I assume) Rick Majerus (under a separate category) would be eligible for the 1st time this year (also Kyle Cassity, but IMO he doesn't have the resume to warrant serious consideration).

Other men's basketball players who aren't currently in the HOF, but perhaps may warrant consideration:

  • Tommie Liddell III - 8th all time in points (probably not in due to off the court factors)
  • Luther Burden - 15th all time in points
  • Carl Johnson - 20th all time in points
  • Virgel Cobbin - 1,000 point club, 4th all time in 3pt made
  • Jerry Koch - 2nd all time in rebounds
  • Ian Vouyoukas - 1,000 point club, 1st all time in blocked shots
  • Josh Fisher - 1st all time in assists, 2x in NIT
  • John Kilo & Gary Lamps - only Academic All-America honorees with previous eligibility who aren't currently in the HOF (do not appear to have on-court contributions that stack up)
  • John Bennington (head coach) - 4th all time in wins, tied for 4th longest tenure (7 seasons), 2nd all time in winning % (min 50 games)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, moytoy12 said:

Jimbo.

 

-perhaps in the Legends Division as since his marriage it seems his posting of cheerleader pics has all but vanished so at this point he is like a one time golf champion now at age 53 shooting 80-80 to miss the cut while the good years fade to being forgotten  :ph34r:

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, cgeldmacher said:

Agree.  The Cardinal Hall of Fame is going to start having the same problem.  They induct four every year.  Pretty soon, we're going to be ending up with guys like Hrabosky and Pendleton getting in.

Nobody really undeserving has gone in yet. McGee and Terry Moore are probably the worst players, and it's pretty tough to be bothered by them going in. But once they finally get Ray Lankford in I'm okay with them barring the door.

I guess I don't mind a bigger Hall when it comes to individual teams, though. The whole idea is to recognize guys who aren't good enough to get into the "real" Halls of Fame. Wouldn't bother me at all if Conklin went in. Even Voyoukas and Fisher have pretty important all time records.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/23/2016 at 2:34 PM, RUBillsFan said:

Are you including Conklin and Majerus in that statement?  Those two absolutely deserve to be in.

My mistake as to Majerus who should definitely be in our HOF.  

As far as players go, we are letting way too many in.  Did I like Conklin?  Of course.  Do I wish he could have played more for us?  Of course.  Do I wish we now have a guy of his ability?  Of course.  Is Brian Conklin truly HOF material?  I say no to him -- and to several others.  What is the standard for Billiken HOF?  a good player?  one of best players over a 1, 2, 3 or 4 year stretch?   If so, then yes, BC qualifies.  But BC was decent his Freshman year, he regressed his Soph year (was injured), he was good his JR year and he was truly good to great his SR year.  Just not sure he merits HOF based largely on his 1 great year.  Then again, if SLU is going to guys every year -- even if we have average to bad players and teams - then he sure is HOF compared to what we have seen these past 2 years -- and probably this coming year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Clock_Tower said:

My mistake as to Majerus who should definitely be in our HOF.  

As far as players go, we are letting way too many in.  Did I like Conklin?  Of course.  Do I wish he could have played more for us?  Of course.  Do I wish we now have a guy of his ability?  Of course.  Is Brian Conklin truly HOF material?  I say no to him -- and to several others.  What is the standard for Billiken HOF?  a good player?  one of best players over a 1, 2, 3 or 4 year stretch?   If so, then yes, BC qualifies.  But BC was decent his Freshman year, he regressed his Soph year (was injured), he was good his JR year and he was truly good to great his SR year.  Just not sure he merits HOF based largely on his 1 great year.  Then again, if SLU is going to guys every year -- even if we have average to bad players and teams - then he sure is HOF compared to what we have seen these past 2 years -- and probably this coming year.

How many players has SLU had in their history? 700? 800?

How many SLU players have been 1st team all conference in any season? 25 maybe?

Conklin is a HOFer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The "one good to great year" just happened to include being the leading scorer on what might have been the best Billiken team of the past 50+ years. He's also in the top 10 all time in career FG%, which is pretty good for being a one year wonder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, thetorch said:

How many players has SLU had in their history? 700? 800?

How many SLU players have been 1st team all conference in any season? 25 maybe?

Conklin is a HOFer.

My bad.  I have now answered my own questions.  The Billiken HOF is not as elite as I thought it was.  We have been inducting far less quality basketball players than Conklin for years and the trend of continuing to induct similar new players each year (if our basketball teams are bad like these past 2 years) just means even more probably less deserving players will be added.  So yes, Brian Conklin deserves inclusion over the likely guys to soon be added to the HOF.

And yes, one of way to look at the numbers is to say "25 maybe" have been elected out of 700 or 800.  Another way to look at things is that SLU basketball has had alot of poor to mediocre years and yet we just keep adding players.  From SLU's perspective, yes, it makes sense to reward former players, to given them a reason to come back to campus, to solicit financial donations from them, to give them another reason to say nice things about SLU and to honor them so that they might possibly help encourage others (from family to friends) to also attend SLU.  But being a truly elite club it is not.

And also, if we are going to compare guys based on stats, I am sure someone has a way to factor in players from different eras (Freshmen used to be ineligible, many of the 800 or so guys played before the 3 point shot...) and to compare stats from today involving scoring and offense which is completely different in recent years due to the more modern style of play, moderns rules and officiating, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

-halls of fame and their membership can lead to interesting debates

-I haven't looked at the bball players in SLU's hof to assess the bar for entrance but Conklin being a leader and all conf on the first tourney team in years makes me think he deserves inclusion

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Clock_Tower said:

My bad.  I have now answered my own questions.  The Billiken HOF is not as elite as I thought it was.  We have been inducting far less quality basketball players than Conklin for years and the trend of continuing to induct similar new players each year (if our basketball teams are bad like these past 2 years) just means even more probably less deserving players will be added.  So yes, Brian Conklin deserves inclusion over the likely guys to soon be added to the HOF.

And yes, one of way to look at the numbers is to say "25 maybe" have been elected out of 700 or 800.  Another way to look at things is that SLU basketball has had alot of poor to mediocre years and yet we just keep adding players.  From SLU's perspective, yes, it makes sense to reward former players, to given them a reason to come back to campus, to solicit financial donations from them, to give them another reason to say nice things about SLU and to honor them so that they might possibly help encourage others (from family to friends) to also attend SLU.  But being a truly elite club it is not.

And also, if we are going to compare guys based on stats, I am sure someone has a way to factor in players from different eras (Freshmen used to be ineligible, many of the 800 or so guys played before the 3 point shot...) and to compare stats from today involving scoring and offense which is completely different in recent years due to the more modern style of play, moderns rules and officiating, etc.

We don't have to compare stats.  Conklin was a 1st team all conference player.  I think any school would put a player who made 1st team all conference in their respective HOF.  All conference selctions mean he was an elite player, cuts across any gaps in statistics over the years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, thetorch said:

We don't have to compare stats.  Conklin was a 1st team all conference player.  I think any school would put a player who made 1st team all conference in their respective HOF.  All conference selctions mean he was an elite player, cuts across any gaps in statistics over the years.

Ian Vouyoukas was 1st team all conference.  Tommie Liddell was Newcomer of the Year and 2nd team all-conference.   Liddell also had tons of assists and was one of the best rebounders (greatest rebounding guard) in SLU history.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/28/2016 at 11:13 AM, Clock_Tower said:

And yes, one of way to look at the numbers is to say "25 maybe" have been elected out of 700 or 800.  Another way to look at things is that SLU basketball has had alot of poor to mediocre years and yet we just keep adding players...

"We've had a lot of bad years" is a pretty odd argument to keep a guy out who was one of the brightest stars in one of the brightest periods in recent team history. If we were Kentucky, maybe one all-conference season wouldn't be that big a deal. But we're not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, hsmith19 said:

"We've had a lot of bad years" is a pretty odd argument to keep a guy out who was one of the brightest stars in one of the brightest periods in recent team history. If we were Kentucky, maybe one all-conference season wouldn't be that big a deal. But we're not.

Exactly.  That's why I am not keeping Conklin out.  That's also why I didn't make the argument you suggest.  Instead, my original concern was wondering how "elite" the Billiken HOF really is.  Larry Hughes, Anthony Bonner, Ed Macauly, Dick Boushka, Rogers and probably a few others were truly elite.  Arguments can be made for another tier of special players such as modern players Burden, Douglas, Gray, Claggett, Highmark, Burden, Perry, Love, Lisch, Kwamain and Jett and the pre-modern era players such as Jack Mimlitz, etc.  I am not attempting a full and complete list but I would Conklin on the next tier of players.

And my point about "We've had a lot of bad years" is that if we keep adding players each year to the HOF but we don't fill our roster with HOF quality players, then we will soon be watering down the HOF.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who's watering it down? Going back to slufan13's post, if you run down the list none of the recent inductees are crazy choices. Lisch, Love, and Marque Perry are the only MBB players inducted in the past 10 years, so it's not like we just keep adding and adding. Is three representatives really too many, even for an era that wasn't very good?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...