2033 Hall of Fame Nominee - Lauri Markkanen

[Donny - Bucks]

As a stretch big extraordinaire, Lauri Markkanen finds himself looking to enter the NBN Hall of Fame after a terrific, successful career. Will this be enough for him to get into the NBN Hall of Fame?

PLAYER PAGE - nothinbutnetleague.altervista.org/NothinButNet/Archive/2032/html/players/player248.htm



CAREER STATS
Games: 1,113
MPG: 34.6
PPG: 22.5
RPG: 11.5
APG: 2.2
SPG: 1.2
BPG: 0.9
TOPG: 1.9
FG%: .447
FT%: .883
3P%: .430

Best Season (2021 Knicks)
Games: 77
MPG: 35.6
PPG: 28.9
RPG: 11.2
APG: 1.9
SPG: 1.4
BPG: 1.0
TOPG: 2.3
FG%: .447
FT%: .854
3P%: .420

Career Highs
Points: 59
Rebounds: 26
Assists: 9
Steals: 7
Blocks: 5

Achievements
Championships: 0
Player of the Game: 209
Player of the Week: 5
Player of the Month: 0
Double Doubles: 712
Triple Doubles: 0

Awards
2019 - All-League Third Team
2020 - All-Star Game Participant
2021 - All-Star Game Participant
2021 - All-League Third Team
2022 - All-Star Game Participant
2024 - All-Star Game Participant
2024 - All-League Third Team
2025 - All-Star Game Participant
2028 - All-League Third Team
2029 - All-Star Game Participant
2030 - All-Star Game Participant



Arguments For Induction
- As a stretch big, Markkanen already lands himself as a marquee player considering we don't have many of them in the league and even amongst those who can shoot, nobody has the volume that Lauri has excelled with throughout his career. As a 43% shooter from downtown over 1,100+ games started, the consistency out of a big man is something we haven't really seen in this league thus far.

- On top of his ability to score, Markkanen also did extremely well on the boards. In terms of "all time rankings", Lauri likely would find himself in the top 10 on the boards while also being one of, if not the leading scorer amongst big men since the restart.

- Finally, Markkanen's ability to do everything well without significant flaws will be a big argument point in whether he is close enough to make the Hall or not. He was always a ~2 stock player who rebounded above average, a guy who assisted more than he turned the ball over, and a scorer who was always efficient enough to be counted on in clutch time. While his career was spent primarily in New York, who have had issues taking it to the next level, Markkanen was a big reason as to why they were almost always a playoff team.

Arguments Against Induction
- No ring and a significant lack of playoff success will hurt the case for Markkanen undoubtedly. For big men, especially big men who don't excel defensively, it's a tough decision as to whether they are Hall of Fame level players. While Markkanen was a good defender, the lack of rings or any All-League team higher than the Third will be a sticking point for some.

- In comparison to guys we've had in the Hall of Fame running, how much better was Markkanen than a player like, say, Rudy Gobert. While he was obviously better and had a better career with more longevity, is it enough to make up for the fact that Gobert only got 1 yes vote and 22 no votes? It's very hard for a "great" big to make the HoF considering the only bigs we've nominated are Karl-Anthony Towns and Anthony Davis, two of the top players in this league so far.

- Lauri's career was interesting. At the beginning, it seemed as if he'd be one of the best scorers in the league and one of the best players we'd see, but by the end of his career, he had declined offensively with less volume. The end of his career did not help his case considering he was less efficient than prior years and found himself as a less-important asset to the Knicks than he had before he moved to the Trailblazers. While I'm not sure this should be a massive argument against him, it's something that has to be taken into account.

Vote carefully, and remember to throw out arguments regardless of which side you're on. This should be a discussion that eventually gets the league to the proper decision on him. Your vote can also be retracted after it's been cast if you feel like switching to the other side based on the arguments that have been made. To be inducted, a player needs 70% and to be considered in a later class they need 50%. Vote carefully.

***BONUS - Don't forget that everyone who votes gets $100 and the person that makes the best argument or contributes to the discussion the best will be awarded an extra $100***

10.1.1

[ucfinfan86]

I think I’m leaning towards yes. My first thought was no, but 7 all stars and 4 All league awards is nothing to sneeze at. He’s not usually the type of big I go for. Zyz Zyzwicki could probably average 2 stocks if it played 35mpg. Scoring wise he was very good and limited turnovers. Rebounding was never a real strength but during his prime he was at 12 a game and peaked at 13 which is good, but not elite. I always thought he would be best with a real defensive center and I don’t think he ever had that once throughout his career. I’m initially going yes.  PF was a weak position in the league but he was one of the top 3 for a majority of his career.  I’m interested to hear others arguments either way.

[frosty]

Voting no here. Hall of very good. Despite making a couple all league 3rd teams i never felt like he was in the very top tier of big. Good longevity though

[pjclippers]

I was on the fence but will vote yes - wasn't the typical shot-blocking big that I like but still rebounded and scored well and def helped from the outside. That plus the number of awards and All-Star appearances barely pushed him over the top for me.

[lynchcats]

He had seven All-Star appearances. That's hard to do no matter what position you're at to be considered one of the top two players in your conference for that steady of a period of time. Easy yes.

[josephballin11]

I voted no. It is the Hall of Fame, not the Hall of Good. He was solid player in the NBN for a while, but never was a top two PF in the league. If you want to argue longevity, sure.

[hunt54]

Voted No. The collection of his achievements and stats are impressive however the spacing of 2,3 and 4 years of ALL-NBN third team led me to no. He seemed to be right behind two or three other guys during his career. If a first or second team was thrown in there with closer spacing of all-NBN teams a more definitive dominance and peak would most likely lead him to win my vote over. Sadly, this is not the case...

[jjbarea]

I was very much on the fence with my vote. However, after some careful thought, I opted to vote no.

I appreciate the All-Star appearances, the longevity and the fact that he was a formidable stretch big in a league that generally lacks that skill set. However, the fact that he never registered higher than All-NBN Third Team or won a championship really pulled me towards a no.

In my humble opinion, the Hall should be reserved exclusively for legends of the game.

[JCog72]

Going no here. He was a very good player that could score. But other than that he wasn’t elite at anything else and is just not worthy of the HOF

[Donny - Bucks]

Bump. Was hoping for more deliberation on this. Will post two or more Saturday.

[carmelo115]

Gonna go no. Normally I see 7 ASG and think obvious yes, but PF is a weak position here and like many others said, he was very good, but one of the greatest ever? No

[vanimmer]

another no vote
He was never a player i coveted and that is not a good sign.
He was a good scorer, a decent rebounder, bd stcokgenerator and 2 TO guy. He'd be a HOF SF candidate wit those stats

[hunt54]

what would be his closest comp thats in the hall

[John1974]

Voted yes as I was on fence but the awards are just enough for me

[ucfinfan86]

I’ve been swayed to No. Despite the awards he was never someone who was an elite player nor someone I ever tried to acquire. I do think we have a clean slate here for the HOF and would prefer to keep it limited to just the all time greats