Page 1 of 1
Jamal Mashburn SLN HOF VOTE
Posted: March 7th, 2024, 2:28 pm
by SoNicks
One of the most prolific wing scorers of his age, Mashburn seemingly did it all. A long career with a fuck ton of scoring, only trailing scoring GOAT TB in HOF scorers. He grabs boards, had a respectable stock level, made some all league teams, and was a regular at the allstar game. He is most certainly the biggest tweener in this draft class, as he beats bigs like dikembe, but is still right in the same HOF score as kittles, and eddie jones, neither of who have been admitted into the Hall. In what I hope generates a great debate, the decision is yours… VOTE!
Jamal Mashburn SLN HOF VOTE
Posted: March 7th, 2024, 2:43 pm
by Jordo
immediately voted no when i saw kittles mentioned
Jamal Mashburn SLN HOF VOTE
Posted: March 7th, 2024, 2:49 pm
by Tyler
All time single game points record holder… scored 69 on AK
Nice
Jamal Mashburn SLN HOF VOTE
Posted: March 11th, 2024, 10:37 pm
by Joe
Voted yes. Best or second best player at his position (Jamison) for 6 or 7 years, had zero statistical weaknesses, really long peak (8 straight seasons of 27+ ppg!) - if not for Dirk and Manu getting tons of freebies, I think his season scoring record of 36.6ppg stands for a long time. Not super tied to the HOF stats as Mash didn’t get any assists. No titles, but def one of the best to never get one
Jamal Mashburn SLN HOF VOTE
Posted: March 12th, 2024, 11:58 am
by Derek
Any stats you could provide? How do you find his player page easily
Jamal Mashburn SLN HOF VOTE
Posted: March 12th, 2024, 3:33 pm
by mantypas/CavsCzar
history/08/ Heat team page
Jamal Mashburn SLN HOF VOTE
Posted: March 12th, 2024, 3:47 pm
by Tyler
No brainer yes for me. He was unbelievable
Jamal Mashburn SLN HOF VOTE
Posted: March 12th, 2024, 5:08 pm
by Derek
I was thinking no but after examining his player page, I went yes.
8 straight seasons of being a hyper efficient ~30 PPG scorer while being a good rebounder and maintaining a 1:1 stock:TO is enough I think. Definitely less of a slam dunk than the group of PGs though.