Look for starters, I think Cam Neely was a great player. And if healthy he would have been even better. To me I cant understand why its a crime to say he shouldnt be in the Hall. Now I've heard the arguments as to why he should. And I've heard people complain that lesser players are in over him (thats true) but its beside the point. This is a great comparison for me to judge him on. If he's SUPPOSED to be in there than why isnt Rick Martin in there? Not saying he should be a legit Hall of Famer but here's my comparison. Martin - Played ten seasons Neely - Thirteen seasons (a few when he was injured) Martin - 384 career goals, 0.56 goals per game. Neely - 395 career goals, 0.54 goals per game. Martin - 701 career points, 1.02 points per game Neely - 694 points, 0.96 points per game Martin - Two first team all-star selections, two second team all star selections Neely - Four second team all-star selections Martin's top goal seasons - 52, 52, 49, 45, 44. Neely's top seasons - 55, 51, 50, 42, 37 So explain this to me. Rick Martin was on one of the best lines of all time (French Connection Line) had a short career and is shafted because of this. Had he played longer in to 80s he'd have had 500 or more goals. But Neely has 4 good seasons and its a crime to say he shouldnt be in the Hall. Neely had a shortened career too, which is hurting him, so why should he get in but Martin shouldnt? I know, Neely was more physical and he had that season where he hit 50 goals in 49 games and I love him and have nothing against him. But to me he inst even the most surprising Bruin to never be in the Hall yet IMO, that goes to Rick Middleton. Yes Don Cherry loved him, but was he any better than Rick Martin? The numbers say Martin was a better player. Add the fact that Neely was more physical and you have to even players IMO. Both were good players and both played with great players but before you say Neely HAS to be in think of Martin. Not saying Martin should have been a shoo-in but he's no worse off than Neely.