Claude Lemieux = HHOF?

Status
Not open for further replies.

lemieux32*

Guest
RSBPC said:
Let me cut to the chase. Simple yes or no question.

Do you think Claude Lemieux was a better hockey player than Cam Neely?

Obviously it depends on who you have already, but in general I would say yes. Neely could score and was tough, but Lemieux was clutch, could score, play defense, was tough and the list goes on.
 

RSBPC

Registered User
Jan 19, 2005
2,356
0
lemieux32 said:
Obviously it depends on who you have already, but in general I would say yes. Neely could score and was tough, but Lemieux was clutch, could score, play defense, was tough and the list goes on.

I think your bias is getting in the way.

I don't understand how anyone could think that Claude Lexmieux was a better hockey player than Cam Neely.

If anyone else agrees with him/her...I'd love to hear why.
 
Last edited:

Horse

Go Canucks!
Feb 14, 2005
1,508
0
Cariboo, BC
Bring Back Bucky said:
Brad Park is in the Hall, has been since 98 :)

Anderson has appeared in court in BC to face the music. I can't remember the outcome, but believe he has no income or interest in earning one to show that he's not a loser as a parent.

Former Edmonton Oiler Glenn Anderson agreed to an out-of-court child support settlement for his 13-year-old son. Anderson will pay a lump sum of $80,000 and $602 a month, starting January 1st. Child Maintenance authorities in British Columbia said Anderson was more than $125,000 in arrears.
http://www.ncsl.org/programs/cyf/csitn14.htm
 

espo*

Guest
Gee Wally said:
If you had Cam would you trade him straight up for Claude ?



( I rest my case :D )
Nope.he can have all the Conn Smythes he wants,he was'nt as good a player as Neely.Your case is closed.
 

ClaudeLemieux4HOF

Registered User
Jul 15, 2005
643
0
long island, ny
my user name i think says it all...i think he is deserving of being in the HOF, only in colorado was he with superstars on his line and that was toward the end of his career, i also think anderson is a HOFer, but you also have to take into account his linemates, if gretz or mess were my centerman i could put in 200, will he get in, i sadly dont think so just because hes stepped on too many toes
 

discostu

Registered User
Nov 12, 2002
22,512
2,895
Nomadville
Visit site
Dr Love said:
14. What impact did the player have on hockey history? Was he responsible for any rule changes? Did he introduce any new equipment? Did he change the game in any way?

His hit on Kris Draper ignited the fiercest rivalry in hockey in the late 90s.

I think there's more to Lemieux under this category. He brought diving as a tactic to the game. I'm sure he wasn't the first to do it, but, he's the first one to really make it a regular part of his routine. It's not something that many people associate as a positive trait, but, it goes hand-in-hand with his reputation as a clutch performer. He'd do anything out there to help his team win.

Today, diving is one of the biggest issues the sport is facing. It's on the rise, as players try to draw more penalties. Without Lemieux, I'm not certain it would be as much as an issue as it is today.

Did he revolutionize the game? Absolutely. Was it in a way that the NHL wants to recognize with a HOF induction? Probably not.
 

V-2 Schneider

Registered User
Mar 8, 2004
908
0
Bill Barber perfected the art of diving, a good 15 years before Claude got into the act.Ken Linesman did a fair job too.
 

Transported Upstater

Guest
lemieux32 said:
Obviously it depends on who you have already, but in general I would say yes. Neely could score and was tough, but Lemieux was clutch, could score, play defense, was tough and the list goes on.



Are you serious?
 

lemieux32*

Guest
I am biased but what did Neely bring? He was tough and he scored goals, so did Lemieux, not as many, but he did so much more. As I said it depends on what I already have on the team. If I need someone to shut down the opposing scorers and put in some goals, then there is no doubt, if I just need a guy to only score goals then I'd go with Neely. It's pretty simple. I think others anti-Lemieux bias is affecting there judgement.
 

Transported Upstater

Guest
lemieux32 said:
I am biased but what did Neely bring? He was tough and he scored goals, so did Lemieux, not as many, but he did so much more. As I said it depends on what I already have on the team. If I need someone to shut down the opposing scorers and put in some goals, then there is no doubt, if I just need a guy to only score goals then I'd go with Neely. It's pretty simple. I think others anti-Lemieux bias is affecting there judgement.


I personally do not have an anti-Lemieux bias. I dislike the Devils and Avs (and Wings, regarding the Avs-Wings rivalry) equally :D and am mostly neutral towards Montreal, although they are one of the teams I like to see win games.

But the fact that Claude did play for teams that I am not a fan of does not contribute to my opinion of him as a player.

People talk about playoffs being the only important thing, but remember, you have to get there first. Also, IMO if there is any one player who deserves the most consideration based on his playoff history it would be Glenn Anderson, not Claude Lemieux.
 

lemieux32*

Guest
TransportedUpstater said:
I personally do not have an anti-Lemieux bias. I dislike the Devils and Avs (and Wings, regarding the Avs-Wings rivalry) equally :D and am mostly neutral towards Montreal, although they are one of the teams I like to see win games.

But the fact that Claude did play for teams that I am not a fan of does not contribute to my opinion of him as a player.

People talk about playoffs being the only important thing, but remember, you have to get there first. Also, IMO if there is any one player who deserves the most consideration based on his playoff history it would be Glenn Anderson, not Claude Lemieux.

Anderson should e in the HOF. I have not said once in this thread whether Claude should or not because I don't know if he should.
 

jiggs 10

Registered User
Dec 5, 2002
3,541
2
Hockeytown, ND
Visit site
habs_24x said:
the case for him is hard to ignore. He had a great career and incredible success in the playoffs, the time when it really matters. i say he would be a good fit in the hall.

If Neely who never won anything and never did anything remotely resembling Lemieux's heroics in the playoffs got in, i dont see how Lemieux couldnt get in.

He isn't even CLOSE to making the HOF. Neely never should have made it, either, but Clod shouldn't even be considered! So what if he happened to be on a few good teams? Should Gilbert Dionne make it too? He won a Cup in 1993!

Geez, next you people will be saying Tie Domi should make it! :madfire:
 

Psycho Papa Joe

Porkchop Hoser
Feb 27, 2002
23,347
17
Cesspool, Ontario
Visit site
jiggs 10 said:
He isn't even CLOSE to making the HOF. Neely never should have made it, either, but Clod shouldn't even be considered! So what if he happened to be on a few good teams? Should Gilbert Dionne make it too? He won a Cup in 1993!

Geez, next you people will be saying Tie Domi should make it! :madfire:
The difference is that Claude was an impact player in at least two of the cups he won. IMO the Habs of 86 and at least one of the Devils teams would not have won the cup without his efforts. The guy was quite simply, clutch. That's why he deserves a look. Certainly as much a look as Clark Gillies got. Clark was never the difference maker on a cup team like Claude was on at least two cup winners.
 

John Flyers Fan

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
22,416
16
Visit site
Psycho Papa Joe said:
The difference is that Claude was an impact player in at least two of the cups he won. IMO the Habs of 86 and at least one of the Devils teams would not have won the cup without his efforts. The guy was quite simply, clutch. That's why he deserves a look. Certainly as much a look as Clark Gillies got. Clark was never the difference maker on a cup team like Claude was on at least two cup winners.

Two wrongs don't make a right.
 

Psycho Papa Joe

Porkchop Hoser
Feb 27, 2002
23,347
17
Cesspool, Ontario
Visit site
John Flyers Fan said:
Two wrongs don't make a right.
wrongs.gif
 

VanIslander

A 19-year ATDer on HfBoards
Sep 4, 2004
35,133
6,428
Let's put things in perspective.

Claude is in the hall as the member of three Cup winning teams and is additionally mentioned because of some of his 24 playoff GWGs (!).
But to reserve space to profile his entire career? I don't think so.

Yet I'd definitely pick him to play on an all-time best line-up. In the history draft on this forum I'll draft him as my fourth line right winger, if other g.m.'s don't beat me to it!

He was an incredible impact role player, one of the best ever in the playoffs.
 

MS

1%er
Mar 18, 2002
53,362
83,430
Vancouver, BC
Interesting that so many people rate Mike Richter as a HHOFer, but so few would rate Lemieux that way.

To me, they had nearly identical careers. Spotty regular season performers - a couple good seasons, a lot of mediocre ones. Few awards or All-star berths. Similar career duration. And a history of elite performances on championship teams and big-time clutch play.

Neither should get in, but I think Lemieux is a little closer call than some people are willing to admit.
 

Big Phil

Registered User
Nov 2, 2003
31,703
4,144
Personally I dont think Richter should get in. Or Claude Lemieux. Look the guy had no more than 81 points in a season. Sure he played well in the playoffs but just because he won a Conn Smythe Trophy doesnt mean he gets into the Hall. Reggie Leach won one and he isnt or wont ever be in there. Nieuwendyk won one and he's borderline. Now Lemieux isnt near Nieuwy's level so I'll say know way. And even if he wasnt a cheap shot artist who turtled I'd say no.
 

lemieux32*

Guest
It's funny how many of the No responses are totally based on "cheap shots" or being a pest or things like that. I'm glad you guys aren't HOF voters or a lot of great players (ask anyone about Howe and cheap shots) would never get in.
 

Ogopogo*

Guest
MS said:
Interesting that so many people rate Mike Richter as a HHOFer, but so few would rate Lemieux that way.

To me, they had nearly identical careers. Spotty regular season performers - a couple good seasons, a lot of mediocre ones. Few awards or All-star berths. Similar career duration. And a history of elite performances on championship teams and big-time clutch play.

Neither should get in, but I think Lemieux is a little closer call than some people are willing to admit.

Who thinks Richter should be in?

Lemieux and Richter were both good players but not at all HOF worthy.
 

Hasbro

Family Friend
Sponsor
Apr 1, 2004
52,414
16,381
South Rectangle
Ogopogo said:
Who thinks Richter should be in?

Lemieux and Richter were both good players but not at all HOF worthy.
If Richter does, he's going to have to get alot of leeway due to injuries and the Rangers collapsing around him and alot of credit for the Cup and the World Cup.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->