Hall of Fame Class of 2009 Announced

[Andrew]

Considering the minutes he played, Oden's rookie numbers weren't too shabby at all. Even the injury-prone label is overblown, the time he missed last year came about due to misfortune that can strike any player and wasn't linked to the knee surgery that cost him what should've been his rookie season. If not for missing the 2007/2008 season and the Blazers' history of injury-prone centres, it wouldn't appear to be such a big deal.

[cyanide]

[J@3]

That looks like something out of a horror movie.

[Andrew]

A little less flattering than his posters.

[Martti.]

I loved Jordan's speech.

As he scored the final 18 points to win the game :

"There's no I in team"
"But there's an I in win"

[jonthefon]

I thought Jordan was a dick with his HOF speech, as if he made it up on the spot. I mean, that Russell anecdote was a low blow with Stockton present and taking a shot at Krause too? He never really was the classiest guy, even if he is the greatest player ever. Robinson, Stockton and Sloan made better, classier speeches where they actually thanked the people who helped them on the way, rather than coming off as egotistical jerks.

[Andrew]

Similar sentiments are expressed in this article.

I believe one of the first things Michael Jordan did was thank Scottie Pippen. As for the "shot" at Byron Russell, Russell himself didn't seem to be offended. A low blow? Come on, that was a story that deserved to be told. And as for grovelling towards Jerry Krause, since when did Krause become this saintly hero? This is the guy who wanted to trade Scottie Pippen for Antoine Walker. The guy who drafted Stacey King. The guy who said organisations win championships? So Michael Jordan had a dig, like so many people do. He wasn't exactly Michael Moore at the Oscars. His Q&A session was also rather humble as he downplayed the "Greatest of All-Time" tag and paid homage to those who came before him as well as the current crop of NBA stars.

Seriously, he spends the better part of two decades listening to jaded legends from the 60s and 70s talking down his career and the generation of players to which he belonged, he ribs a few people and he's an egotistical jerk and a classless guy? Wojnarowski accuses Jordan of being petty, yet I would say the same of his critique. It's certainly very selective in its quotations and paraphrasing and very meticulous in taking things out of context. I like Wojnarowski's columns, I don't always agree with them, but here I think he's trying too hard to be that vocal guy who dares to write something negative at a time when there's a lot of nostalgia and praise for Jordan going about.

It's curious how Jordan is held to a different standard. Legends from decades before him arrogantly refuse to give their successors credit, nothing is said. Charles Barkley comes out with some absolutely outrageous rubbish at times, but he's hailed as one of sports' classic comedic characters. Michael Jordan dares to tread the same path, and he's made out to be the world's biggest jerk.

I know I'm not exactly unbiased here, but it's one of things that annoys me. Especially because the slightest negative thing you say about LeBron or Kobe these days apparently makes you a "hater". I just think everyone should be held to the same standard in these matters.

[The X]

As I've said all along, Michael Jordan is a superb basketball player, but that doesn't mean he's a superb human being. We all have our faults after all. Some like to run up gambling debts, some cheat on their wives, some punch their teammates, some pick Adam Morrison ahead of what seemed like a gimme at the time in Brandon Roy when Bobcats had a starting SF (Gerald Wallace) & no starting SG (unless Matt Carroll is your man). In the end, MJ got the job done on the basketball court & that's why he was inducted in the HOF. We might not agree with all of his methods along the way (nor can we with guys like Karl Malone, Isiah Thomas or Charles Barkley), but really, does it matter? He's a great basketball player & we can't discount what he has meant for the game of basketball.

[Andrew]

Well put, though for all his faults I don't think he's rotten to the core either. If he is, then the same could be said for a lot of his peers.

[The X]

By no means is he rotten to the core. He just seems like your average guy. Put most people in his situation in the limelight where people are constantly putting you on a pedestal only to what to knock you down, I'm sure that must have a big effect on your outlook on life.

What made MJ so great was what made guys like Bill Russell, John Stockton & Kobe Bryant great, is his unrelenting desire to win every game, every possession.

I can see both sides of the coin with the Krause thing. I do think organisations win championships, otherwise we wouldn't see the Celtics, Lakers & Spurs do it so often. But obviously players do too. But I think the fact the comment came from Krause instead of somebody MJ respected was probably main reason for the dig. I wish, like many others, he had taken the higher road, but it's probably something that still irks him that he felt compelled to retire in 1998.

I don't have any issues with the Russell comment as Byron Russell was the one that trash talked in the first place.

It's curious how Jordan is held to a different standard. Legends from decades before him arrogantly refuse to give their successors credit, nothing is said. Charles Barkley comes out with some absolutely outrageous rubbish at times, but he's hailed as one of sports' classic comedic characters. Michael Jordan dares to tread the same path, and he's made out to be the world's biggest jerk.

It's because Charles is funny, MJ is not. It's just a fact of life. The same jibe that two different people (whether MJ or Chuck, or male or female) will be taken in two different ways. Non-verbal communication & people's perception plays a big part. If Barkley says something, then people just let it wash off as they don't take him seriously. MJ, somebody who's a bit more serious & people will hang more on his every word, people will take it in a different light. Whether that's right or wrong, that's just life I guess.

[Andrew]

Good points. Also, I have to concede that I did find the Leroy Smith stuff a bit uncomfortable, but not knowing the extent of their friendship or friendly rivalry or whatever they have, perhaps it comes off badly to the rest of us.

I think that's a fair call on Barkley too but it's too convenient an excuse to make for him. I think you've hit the nail on the head there of course and in a way it does make Barkley's barbs less stinging at times, but I think he's extended a lot of leeway all the same, almost unfairly so. Whether that's right or wrong is an interesting question. I suppose the line is drawn at some point for everyone, the line being further away if you're a better comedian.

To me it's kind of like people who justify rudeness with "I'm a straight shooter" or "That's just how I am". I mean, talk about a get out of jail free card.

[The X]

Yep, I'd agree with all that. Forgot to mention the Leroy Smith stuff, but you could see he looked a little uncomfortable. I thought he should've laid off him a bit.

[Andrew]

And of course, if "That's just me"/"That's just (whoever)" is a valid excuse, there's MJ's justification right there.

I suppose I'd like to think that some of those more uncomfortable moments in his speech come down to him being a bit awkward as a "comedian" or not so good at speaking from the heart. The league may have seen few players that good, but it's seen much better "quote machines" than Michael Jordan.

[J@3]

Good:

Thanking Scottie Pippen, was a good way to start things off

Giving credit to David Thompson for inspiring him, inc. swearing. Bonus points

Mentioning his college teammates

Showed he was listening to the other inductees speeches

Talking about his brothers/sisters. Seems proud of his family

Sports Illustrated mention was funny, he handled that better than the Leroy Smith stuff

Liked the Reinsdorf story, also pays credit to the Bulls organization

I get the organisation wins championships story... he's right, whether people think it was wrong or not. If he doesn't like the guy is he supposed to pretend he does?

Talking about his family, I see his point. Probably poor wording though "I wouldn't want to be you guys"

Stuff about his mum was nice

I liked the Gervin/Thomas/Magic story, he didn't make it sound like "Ha! Look at me now" or anything like that. If anything he showed them a lot of respect

Wtf was wrong with the Riley story? It was said in jest

JVG story was funny as well

Gives credit to his coaches, including Tex Winter ("I" in "win" story was funny too)

Talking about the media, even says that just because he disagrees it doesn't mean they were wrong.

The Bryon Russell story was good, and as he said at the start, something people didn't know about him

Bad:

John Stockton's facial expressions during the Russell story... get over it.

Leroy Smith... I didn't like that, the fact that he was flown out to see Jordan's induction. Unnecessary imo.

I read that Yahoo article expecting to agree completely, but really I have no idea wtf that guy is talking about. What came across to me is that the guy was so good at the sport that he needed things and people to constantly motivate him to play... and really, that's pretty understandable when you think about it. How many people get bored constantly winning in video games and turn the difficulty up? You can't do that in real life.

He was respectful about everyone he spoke of, even Bryon Russell who he said was a great guy. I think people are just looking for something that isn't there for the sake of being controversial. Wtf was he supposed to say? "Aw come on guys I wasn't that good"?

[Drex]

I do think that MJ has a huge ego, and it showed in his speech. But who wouldn't? He's the most famous athlete of all times, IMO. I'd probably collect the fallen ears of the people who've heard me talk about how great I am all day. Let the man have some fun, even if he didn't put it perfectly in words, most of his speech was respectful.

[shadowgrin]

“I wanted to make sure you (his HS coach) understood: You made a mistake, dude.”

He might be arguably the greatest player NBA history but come on. He should learn to move on. The dude and the whole world knows about it.

He's coming out like bitter like Shaq if Jordan is still bitter about his HS days. I wouldn't be surprised if he becomes a bitter and jaded person like the generation of players before him.

The story about Russell was gold.

[benji]

Seriously, he spends the better part of two decades listening to jaded legends from the 60s and 70s talking down his career and the generation of players to which he belonged, he ribs a few people and he's an egotistical jerk and a classless guy? ... It's curious how Jordan is held to a different standard. Legends from decades before him arrogantly refuse to give their successors credit, nothing is said.

Oh, come on. There's no double standard or serious media lynchmob against Michael Jordan. Half the people are defending him and he'll be forgotten by Tuesday especially in the wake of Serena Wiliams and Kayne West. The media practically ginned one up to go after LeBron James over nothing, they've gone after Shaq, Tim Hardaway, and how many others over stupid things they've said. I've read tons of pieces of the media going after Russell and crew when they say what they've said about everyone ever including people who played in their same generation.

Who cares about this crap, or even a lame speech, we've known Jordan to be an epic asshole for years now. The only shocking thing is that some media circlejerkers who apparently think a speech revealed some horrible secret and their worldview was crushed. If he went up there and basically ripped on people like he used to do to teammates, questioning their sexuality or insulting them based on their ethnicity, and then ran off and punched John Stockon in the face. If he went up there and gave a boilerplate contentless "what everyone wants to hear" speech like Barack Obama always does. Who cares? He deserves the Hall for his play. Hell, OJ deserves his spot in the Hall and he murdered two people.

The media is obsessed with images, narratives and personalities? I'M SHOCKED! They care about this to the expense of discussing sports? WHEN DID THIS HAPPEN.

As long as they aren't raping and murdering little girls (like Stephen Jackson did in 1998) or other things that affect their play on the court who cares?

[NovU]

Adrian Wojnarowski's article sounds so misleading. Jordan's speech wasn't as bad as what the guy's claiming in his article. It wasn't nasty or offending. It was honest but unpolished. Michael Jordan actually has been very humble and has shown tons of class in most of his interviews. Those tend to go unappreciated while a few gets more attention to make issues in papers and cause a controversy.

Egotistical and clasless? That's just absurd. For a guy who was more popular than the sport itself, I think he was on par in his attitude pretty much all his career.

[jonthefon]

Really, the thing that gets me is that HOF induction speeches shouldn't really have anything other than humility and perhaps stuff like opinions and anecdotes which don't involve taking a shot at someone else. Robinson and Stockton made those types of speeches. Hell, Rickey Henderson made that sort of speech and if Rickey knows what Rickey needs to do with his speech...

I'm not saying Jordan's speech was a giant pile of trash where he went all "me against the world" against everyone (though I probably did sound like that with my first comment), openly dissed other players and left those who helped him on the way in the dark. But it didn't come off too well with every other HOF speech out there. They don't have to be the same formula everytime, but I think there's some sort of invisible line which decides what can be said.

[Andrew]

Oh, come on. There's no double standard or serious media lynchmob against Michael Jordan.

I didn't mean to suggest that he is the only player to be held to a double standard or that everyone's out to get him. I was responding to Wojnarowski's column and others who hold that sentiment, giving my take on the situation and I suppose my take on their take. I certainly won't claim to be unbiased here, I'll admit that right now.

Really, the thing that gets me is that HOF induction speeches shouldn't really have anything other than humility and perhaps stuff like opinions and anecdotes which don't involve taking a shot at someone else.

But who says speeches have to be like that? The shots he took really weren't as vile as they're making them out to be, in my view. The Leroy Smith stuff does stand out as something that was quite awkward and I have to admit I didn't much care for it, but it's not like he got up there and bragged that he was the greatest player ever or refused to give anyone else credit. It was more about talking what motivated him, telling some stories that haven't been told before and ribbing a few people he knows a lot better than we do. I get the other side of the Krause stuff but as Jae said, should he have pretended to like Krause just because he's giving a HOF induction speech? If he had, I'm sure there'd be people calling him phony.

I'm not saying Jordan's speech was a giant pile of trash where he went all "me against the world" against everyone (though I probably did sound like that with my first comment), openly dissed other players and left those who helped him on the way in the dark. But it didn't come off too well with every other HOF speech out there. They don't have to be the same formula everytime, but I think there's some sort of invisible line which decides what can be said.

Apart from his old high school teammate, which players did he diss? He told a story about Byron Russell talking trash and how that motivated him. He was respectful of Thomas, Gervin and Magic as he spoke about how he felt he had to prove he belonged in the NBA's elite.

Whom did he leave out that he should have acknowledged? Tim Grover I guess, but he opened by acknowledging Scottie Pippen then went on to acknowledge Phil Jackson, Dean Smith, his parents, his family, Jerry Reinsdorf and the Bulls organisation, whom he thanked. Krause is in there but there's two sides to that issue. Was he supposed to thank every single one of his teammates that he's ever had?

[benji]

They're right about his character, but they picked the wrong piece of evidence and did so mainly as this is new and they have nothing else to write about because they're members of the media and thus can't write about basketball or anything else.

[shadowgrin]

This 'issue' about his speech would have never happened if Jordan had thanked Stacey King and Jud Buechler specifically.

[Bodz]

Here's MJ's Career Highlights featured from the HOF 2009

phpBB [video]

[Clutch]

I rarely post outside the 'Dynasty' section but something about this dude's article from Yahoo! Sports really irked me. Here's the link and some choice highlights:

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slug=a ... &type=lgns

○ "he was crying over the passing of that old Jordan, and it wouldn’t be long until he climbed out of his suit and back into his uniform and shorts, back into an adolescent act that’s turned so tedious"

○ "This wasn’t a Hall of Fame induction speech, but a bully tripping nerds with lunch trays in the school cafeteria. He had a responsibility to his standing in history, to players past and present, and he let everyone down."

○ "Jordan wandered through an unfocused and uninspired speech at Symphony Hall, disparaging people who had little to do with his career"

○ "This had been a moving and inspirational night for the NBA – one of its best ceremonies ever – and five minutes into Jordan’s speech it began to spiral into something else. Something unworthy of Jordan’s stature, something beneath him."

○ "this was no public service for him. Just because he was smiling didn’t mean this speech hadn’t dissolved into a downright vicious volley."

○ "When basketball wanted to celebrate Jordan as the greatest player ever, wanted to honor him for changing basketball everywhere, he was petty and punitive."

○ "he keeps chasing something that he’ll never catch, and sometimes, well, it all seems so hollow for him. This is why he’s a terrible basketball executive because he still hasn’t learned to channel his aggressions into hard work on that job."

○ "it reveals him to be oddly insecure."

○ "Jordan showed little poise and less grace."

○ "What fueled his fury as a thirtysomething now fuels his bitterness as a lost, wandering fortysomething who threatened a comeback at 50."

First off and pardon my French but... who the FUCK is Adrian Wojonssarksowki to the GREAT MJ anyway!? This dude couldn't wipe MJ's sweat off the floor and his belittling 'Holier-than-thou' tone really pisses me off.

I didn't see the speech live and started to read this article because it was frontpage for Yahoo! Articles. After reading I thought "Good GOD! This CAN'T be right! Jordan's competitive but he wouldn't get all angry and bitter like that during such a special moment."

Sure enough, I watched the vid clip of his speech and see that Wojnosakface's article is taken TOTALLY OUT OF CONTEXT. The actual speech is moving, personal, funny and intentionally highlighted players and career moments that Jordan knew fans associate with him the most. He didn't do this in an angry, 'attacking' way as the Yahoo! Article suggests; rather it was done in a more humorous, 'reverse-roast' sort of way but definitely not mean to be serious attacks or taken out of context as it was in this bogus article

MJ was trying to poke fun, trying to keep it light. He was being gracious, dignified but also without looking the "i'm not worthy" tool. MJ's nobody's fool; to me, the speech was about a man who recognizes his impact on an industry, a business, which the NBA is. It's all about dollars and he knew how much the league needed, benefited and profited off of him just as much as it was a vehicle for his own success

Back to the article, it made me sick to my stomach how MJ's words were twisted/warped/perverted just for the sake of this supposed Sports Journalist's means of getting more web hits and publicity. And hits it continues to get with it's 11500+ "buzz ups"; I'm probably helping just from writing this but oh well.

Wojnawhoever takes the angle in his article that somehow MJ's still driven by competition, that it still consumes him, that he's corrupt for it, that MJ is a "tedious" and tired "adolescent act." I guess it's media sensationalism at it's best; or maybe at it's worst depending on how you see it. But I'd take news of MJ's tedious and tired act over Wojnarowski's negative, tedious and tired HACK sports writing any day.

[benji]

And who the fuck are you to Adrian Wojnarowski?

The actual speech is moving, personal, funny and intentionally highlighted players and career moments that Jordan knew fans associate with him the most. He didn't do this in an angry, 'attacking' way as the Yahoo! Article suggests; rather it was done in a more humorous, 'reverse-roast' sort of way but definitely not mean to be serious attacks or taken out of context as it was in this bogus article

MJ was trying to poke fun, trying to keep it light. He was being gracious, dignified but also without looking the "i'm not worthy" tool.

That's the thing about perception.