Seriously, what is going on here, and why does the Hall have an anti-Larry Foust agenda. It’s almost like he’s blackballed.

https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask?q=nba+players+with+the+most+all-star+appearances+1949-50+to+1969-70

https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask?q=nba+players+with+the+most+all-star+appearances+1949-50+to+1967-68 (example where all the names show up past the 25 name thing on the website)

All of these guys, except for Foust, are in the Hall. Foust, an elite defensive player who ranks 11th in the NBA’s first 25 years in all-star appearances, never won a title, but did make it five times, playing in multiple games 7s, and putting up some great performances.

In the 50s decade, he was eighth in scoring and second in total rebounds.

Over the years, the Hall has eventually just let virtually everyone from that era who strung together some good years in, so it is genuinely perplexing.

There have been some rumblings around the game 7 of the 1955 finals potentially being fixed, as Foust’s Fort Wayne team (now the Detroit Pistons) blew a 41-24 lead. But those accusations were thrown at Andy Phillip, who did end up making the Hall of Fame anyways with arguably a worse career aside from that.

Anyways, 1950s basketball might not be the most interesting thing in the world, but I do think this is the single weirdest Hall of Fame exclusion considering it’s been 65 years now since he retired and he’s been dead for 40 years. Maybe the committee genuinely forgot about him.

Morezingis | Timberwolves

295 | 9 hours ago

Worth noting that in the 50s, every team was required to have one all-star. So that merit doesn’t mean as much then as it does now. That said, players like Mikan liked him, he was a highly respected defender, and he held his own against Bill Russell and the Celtics in the finals (despite being swept… Boston was very good.)

A few years ago his Nephew, /u/fcancer13 posted here about this topic saying:

“He was my uncle. He didn’t make it because he really rubbed some people the wrong way. Didn’t play the political games either. Really sad. I’m trying to get him in so anyone who has research that would help. I know it’s a long shot. Here’s a pic after the infamous crash landing in an Iowa field”

Pickleskennedy1

50 | 9 hours ago

With the fewer teams and him playing on some pretty solid rosters I don’t think there was a single year where he was an all-star but wouldn’t have made it if they weren’t just trying to throw someone from his team in. That was the rule until 1973.

The thing about his nephew is interesting, will check that out

lifestepvan | Supersonics

46 | 7 hours ago

every team was required to have one all-star

Now I really wanna see someone go through all the seasons as if that rule never got dropped and look at the all-time All Star selections.

barath_s | Lakers

19 | 6 hours ago

You think it will reduce superteams ?

30 teams = 30 all stars.

Doesn’t leave much chance for the 2nd best player to also make an all star team (injury sub?)

Which cpuld hurt some egos and paychecks

GregSays | Celtics

29 | 6 hours ago

2017 Steph Curry misses the all star game coming off being unanimous MVP

SporTEmINd | Bulls

9 | 5 hours ago

That rule doesn’t matter that much since there were so few teams. (The Pistons got 2+ all stars every year.) What might have mattered is that there was a max limit per team. At peak, the Celtics could have 6 all stars but were limited to 3. So that allowed a couple undeserving players

In general, if Foust had 7 all star apps instead of 8, it would still be odd he didn’t get elected given which of his peers got in. He’s 10th in the 50s in PER (https://www.sports-reference.com/stathead/tiny/UKe5I)

licursi14 | Raptors

2 | 4 hours ago

Thanks for your input! This was super insightful and interesting!

HoraceGrant54WhereRU

90 | 8 hours ago

In addition to him being dead for over 40 years and last having played over 60 years ago like OP said, all 3 NBA teams he played for have moved since then:

(1) Fort Wayne Pistons

(2) Minneapolis Lakers

(3) St. Louis Hawks

I imagine teams aren’t going to lobby hard for long-deceased players from other cities to make the Hall of Fame, so it’s harder to make people remember.

Milith | Spurs

25 | 6 hours ago

We can start the conversation.

[deleted]

17 | 5 hours ago

[deleted]

tiltrage

2 | 4 hours ago

Oscar Robertson was a great player, but what exactly would the argument for him in a GOAT conversation even look like?

sctthuynh | GSW

46 | 9 hours ago

It’s because Larry made a Foustian bargain.

MrFishAndLoaves | Pelicans

4 | 9 hours ago

Beat me to it

yourhomeland

14 | 9 hours ago

Defense is an interesting concept

Normal-Weakness-364 | Canada

2 | an hour ago

it is hard to quantify, but there are accounts of players saying he was a strong defender.

The_Black_Adder_

15 | 6 hours ago

I had literally never heard of this guy til rn

RyouBestGirl | Japan

12 | 8 hours ago

Wait until you’ll learn about Gene Shue

Pickleskennedy1

10 | 8 hours ago

Said more than 5 tbf, gentleman Gene is definitely a 50s nickname

Consistent_Boss_4192

-8 | 9 hours ago

Larry’s highlight reel was 12 frames per second.

MrFishAndLoaves | Pelicans

0 | 9 hours ago

Charcoal sketches

_Tar_Ar_Ais_

0 | 8 hours ago

lol

bigraptorr | Raptors

-26 | 8 hours ago

Cuz there was 8 teams in the league.

chazriverstone | Knicks

20 | 8 hours ago

Still waiting on some logical reason for why this would make the it easier for anyone. If there were 8 teams in the league right now, every team would be filled with all stars - you’d legit have a guy like De’Aaron Fox would be coming off the bench

*edit: downvote me all you want - but perhaps also try thinking critically about these things instead of just repeating common talking points. Having less teams inherently makes competition stronger - this is why essentially all the great dynasties in the NBA (and other major sports) have come after the league expands. There are quotes from all time greats about this being the reason their team was able to dominate. Less teams = stronger RELATIVE competition. Again, the key word being RELATIVE though, because we all know there were simply less people playing basketball 75 years ago. But it is also illogical to penalize professional athletes for their careers occurring in less (or more) talented eras

Lie2gether | Heat

-1 | 8 hours ago

You’re applying modern talent logic to a primitive talent pool. That’s the mistake An 8-team league now would be stacked. An 8-team league then wasn’t. What matters is depth + replacement level, not team count.

chazriverstone | Knicks

10 | 8 hours ago

This commenter didn’t say ‘there just wasn’t as much talent in the league’; they said ‘there was only 8 teams in the league’ - you can make a somewhat decent argument for the former, but the latter is completely flawed logic

And anyway, look at the current situation where exactly 0 of our most recent MVP candidates are American - are we now discrediting Jordan and the 80s and 90s because they had such a small percentage of international players? The ‘talent pool’ argument starts to have holes, as well, because it would essentially discredit all past players

Lie2gether | Heat

-11 | 7 hours ago

You sound bright so I wonder if you are fucking with me. Everyone knows “8 teams” is shorthand for when the NBA was barely a thing. Smaller league = earlier stage, less money, fewer players chasing it seriously. Taking that statement literally is silly. It’s like saying early UFC was easier because there were fewer weight classes, while ignoring that MMA was fringe and half the fighters trained out of garages. Context is the whole point.

Pickleskennedy1

13 | 8 hours ago

I don’t see how that’s relevant to everyone with more than 5 all-stars being in except for the guy with 8

Right now, every player who made more than five all-star games from the NBA’s first 25 years is in the Hall of Fame. Except for one guy, who made eight