Do they deserve the Hall part #6

Discussion in 'The History of Hockey' started by Big Phil, May 24, 2007.

  1. Big Phil

    Big Phil Registered User

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2003
    Messages:
    26,992
    Likes Received:
    279
    Trophy Points:
    154
    Roger Crozier - Had about as good of a start to a career as anyone. Then he followed that up with getting ill with pancreatitis. He's the last goalie to ever play in all of his teams games in a season as he did that in '64-65, his rookie year. That year he went 40-22-7 led the league in shutouts, won the Calder Trophy and was a First team all-star. In '66 he led the league in shutouts again and went 27-24-12. He never won more than 23 games after that. He took home the Conn Smythe Trophy in '66 in a losing cause for the Wings and that was as close to the Cup as he ever got. After that he played parts of seasons for Detroit and then Buffalo. He was part of the '75 Buffalo team that lost to Philadelphia. In total he had a career record of 206-197-70. I think had he not been ill early on he would have been a lock for the Hall of Fame. He may never get in as the one good thing about the Hall is that they have never put in a controversial pick from a goalie before.

    Sid Smith - If you have to look this guy up than that's okay. He was a Maple Leaf in the 40s and 50s and won three Cups with them. In 1951 he may have just been the best Leaf player in the playoffs. His stats arent too bad either. Twice 30 or more goals when that number was huge. A first all-star team in '55 and Second team in '51, '52. He also won the Lady Byng in '52, '55 and three times over 50 points. His career was shorter than it could have been and his peak wasnt that overwhelming that it cant be ignored but it deserves some talk. Three times he was in the top 10 in scoring.

    Ken Hodge - Maybe I'm one of the only people that would like to see Hodge get a little more consideration for the Hall. Maybe he doesnt HAVE to get in there but to me he's closer than a lot of people think. He was a First team all-star in '71 and '74. He helped Boston win the Cup in '70 and '72 as well as go to the finals in '74. All of those years he put up good numbers. Hodge was a big part of those Cups. His point totals are pretty good too, 105, 105, 90, 81. You could say he was a product of Orr and Espo and while its true he still managed to get 50 goals in a season once. He has 800 career points in 881 games. He was a top 5 scorer three times. It may have hurt that he wasnt invited to Team Canada '72 and also the fact that he was never able to string two elite seasons together hurt but he's at least at the top of the Hall of very good.
     
  2. MS

    MS Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2002
    Messages:
    24,503
    Likes Received:
    3,155
    Trophy Points:
    231
    Location:
    Vancouver, BC
    No on all 3 guys.

    Crozier is a 'what could have been' if he'd been able to play more than only a couple full seasons after the age of 25. Certainly first 2 seasons of his career were as good of a start as any goalie has ever had, but the rest of his career just isn't good enough. Final 10 years of his career were destroyed by injury/illness, had a few blips but nothing amazing. No Cups, 1 All-Star berth, barely 200 wins. Has an award named after him, which is actually an honour almost on par with an HHOF nod, and that's more than enough.

    Smith had 3 excellent seasons, mixed with several average ones. If you're going to make the HHOF on a prime that short, you have to be a top-5 player in the game (see Dickie Moore). Smith wasn't. If he would have put up 6-8 seasons at the level of his best years, he might deserve consideration.

    Hodge is an interesting case. 3 seasons top-5 in scoring, 2 First-Team All-Star berths, key member of a multiple Cup-winning squad. Pretty good resume. But it's pretty much a consensus that his numbers were horribly inflated from playing with Esposito/Orr/Bucyk. Only had those 3 really good years and was usually a 60-65 point player otherwise. He's borderline - and probably has as good a claim as Gillies, Barber, and Shutt who made it - but I'd say no. Wouldn't be a crime if he got in, though. Certainly the closest of the three guys you list.
     
  3. Hockey Outsider

    Hockey Outsider Registered User

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2005
    Messages:
    4,486
    Likes Received:
    352
    Trophy Points:
    124
    Does anybody know why they named the best save percentage award after Crozier? Wouldn't the "Bower" or "Hasek" have been a more appropriate name for the trophy?
     
  4. Snap Wilson

    Snap Wilson Registered User

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2003
    Messages:
    5,838
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    An easy no to all three. Too many players from the pre-expansion era as it is.

    You finally running out of candidates?
     
  5. MS

    MS Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2002
    Messages:
    24,503
    Likes Received:
    3,155
    Trophy Points:
    231
    Location:
    Vancouver, BC
    The award was donated to the NHL by MBNA Bank, where Crozier was a high-up executive before his death.

    Plante and Sawchuk, who had shorter lives and contributed more to the sport, would seem more deserving of the honour of an award named after him, but that's how it works, I guess.
     
  6. Big Phil

    Big Phil Registered User

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2003
    Messages:
    26,992
    Likes Received:
    279
    Trophy Points:
    154
    Well off the top of my head yeah, until I can string together maybe a few current players on the bubble. Sid Smith is a very unlikely guy to debate and it beats doing th usual Gillies/Federko/Gilmour/Bure thing 50 times. I'll think of a few new names eentually.
     
  7. Hockey Outsider

    Hockey Outsider Registered User

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2005
    Messages:
    4,486
    Likes Received:
    352
    Trophy Points:
    124
    Ah, good to know. Thanks for the info.

    What do people here think of Peter Bondra’s chances? He’s often discussed as a reasonable HHOF candidate on the main boards. The arguments in favor of Bondra is that he’s one of the best goal-scorers of his generation (led the league twice, top ten 6 times), he’s a dangerous SHG threat, and that he was exciting to watch. I think the arguments against are much stronger: he was never a top-ten scorer, he had mediocre playoff performances, never made the all-star team and was never a serious candidate for a major award.
     
  8. 12# Peter Bondra

    12# Peter Bondra Registered User

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2004
    Messages:
    8,688
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    While I really like Bondra, I think that he wont get in. He really tailed off towards the end of his career but he never played on any dominant teams.

    Maybe if the Caps had won the Cup in 1997 (I think it was that year), he would have a bigger chance. The thing which really hurt him was the 94-95 lockout and him coming a bit late into the NHL.
     
  9. LogiquePaR4dOcKs

    LogiquePaR4dOcKs Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2007
    Messages:
    393
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Helsinki, FIN
    How did the 1994-95 lockout hurt him? He led the league with 34 goals in 1995.
     
  10. 12# Peter Bondra

    12# Peter Bondra Registered User

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2004
    Messages:
    8,688
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    He could have had more, thats what I meant by it. Like, some people consider stats to be important and if he had another 50 goal season, it would help his resume.
     
  11. LogiquePaR4dOcKs

    LogiquePaR4dOcKs Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2007
    Messages:
    393
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Helsinki, FIN
    Ok. I did kind of assume that was what you implied.
     
  12. MS

    MS Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2002
    Messages:
    24,503
    Likes Received:
    3,155
    Trophy Points:
    231
    Location:
    Vancouver, BC
    Bondra is such a hard call.

    On one hand, he was probably the single deadliest sniper in the league from 1994-98 (when Bure was injured/playing like crap). 184 goals in 267 games is just crazy production ... 0.7 GPG during the dead puck era. Top-5 in goals 5 times, led the league twice.

    On the other hand, he was a very one-dimensional player. Didn't do anything except score - not physical, iffy defensively, not much of a playmaker. Never finished top-10 in scoring due to his low assist totals. Was (albeit somewhat shockingly) never a post-season All-Star.

    As was already mentioned, he will be hurt by the lockout and by his holdout in 1995-96. If not for those interruptions, he probably hits 60 goals both those seasons which would have been a hell of a feather in his cap and difficult to keep out.

    But 500 goals in the dead puck era is damn impressive - probably moreso than 600 for guys playing in the 1980s. He was certainly a more dominant player than guys like Ciccarelli and Andreychuk.

    He's pretty much the definition of borderline. Won't get in for at least a few years with the logjam of guys waiting right now. Somehow I don't think he'll get in, but it would be far from a crime if he did.
     
  13. 12# Peter Bondra

    12# Peter Bondra Registered User

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2004
    Messages:
    8,688
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The one thing which Andreychuk has on Bondra is the end of his career. He may have been demoted in the end by Tampa but most people will remember how he won the Cup in his (practically) last season while Bondra never had such an ending.

    Another thing is, like you said, he was one-dimensional. He really used his speed and now that that is slightly gone, he aint effective anymore.
     
  14. Big Phil

    Big Phil Registered User

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2003
    Messages:
    26,992
    Likes Received:
    279
    Trophy Points:
    154
    It would have looked better but the right wingers in those years voted better than him were Jagr and Fleury in '95 and Jagr and Mogilny in '96. 60 goals or not he'd still have a tough time cracking an all-star selection. He just didnt pass very much. He had 34 goals in '94-95 but 9 assists. He needed to have a better all around offensive game. He was too much of a one-trick pony as being a sniper.

    And while its hard to believe that the HHOF would not allow him in if he got 60 goals twice think of this: Bure starts a brawl every time his name is mentioned, Denis Maruk scored 60 goals and 136 points in one year and isnt in, and Bernie Nicholls had 70 goals and 150 points one year coupled by two other 100 point seasons. No, I'm not putting Maruk or Nicholls in the HHOF either but IMO Nicholls before Bondra. Unlike Nicholls he doesnt have the playoff numbers and he was never a top 10 player in the game. Bondra is a great pick however for the Hall of very good. And he'll always have a place as a bona-fide NHL sniper.
     
  15. 12# Peter Bondra

    12# Peter Bondra Registered User

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2004
    Messages:
    8,688
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Well, Nicholls got those 150 points playing with Gretzky while Bondra usually played with Pivonka (or at times, Oates).

    He just didnt have the consistency from year to year. From 95 to 98 he scored around 50 goals per season, then the next 2 seasons he scores 52 together, then has another one of 45.

    http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php3?pid=469

    Edit: What I found surprising is his 92-93 totals:
    1992-93 Washington Capitals NHL 83 37 48 85

    Thats almost 50 assists, which is quite uncharacteristic of him.
     
  16. MXD

    MXD James St. John Smythe

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2005
    Messages:
    38,242
    Likes Received:
    1,440
    Trophy Points:
    169
    Occupation:
    Dead
    I said a lot on Bondra's chances to be inducted... Probably the water-mark of very good offensive players who had their primes in the dead puck era. If Bondra is kept out (I don't think he should get in...) that probably means guys like Markus Naslund or Milan Hejduk will never get in no matter what.

    Oh... and Bondra definitely belongs ahead of Nicholls.
     
  17. Bluesfan1981

    Bluesfan1981 Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2006
    Messages:
    591
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    USA

    Roger Crozier - No way.

    Ken Hodge - I agree he should get more consideration, but probably shouldn't make it.

    Sid Smith - Yes, I think so. Why? Because Dick Duff got in. I think he's more deserving than Duff. He was on some excellent Toronto teams in the 40s and 50s and won 3 Stanley Cups. He was a 1st team All-Star once, and a 2nd team All-Star twice, and played in 7 All-Star games. Finished top 10 in scoring 3 times, and top 10 in goals 5 times.
     
  18. Big Phil

    Big Phil Registered User

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2003
    Messages:
    26,992
    Likes Received:
    279
    Trophy Points:
    154
    Nicholls is not a Hall of Famer no. But he was a poitn scoring machine. Sure nothing stood out for him to warrant a HHOF induction but he was a better all around player than Bondra. With Bondra you knew he could score, if you stopped that then it was no problem. Nicholls was a much greater playmaker and even without a Cup had some pretty good playoff numbers. An induction on Team Canada in a Canada Cup would have helped along wiht a Cup but it didnt. Still he's better than Bondra IMO.
     
  19. MXD

    MXD James St. John Smythe

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2005
    Messages:
    38,242
    Likes Received:
    1,440
    Trophy Points:
    169
    Occupation:
    Dead
    Well... Numbers ARE important, and Bondra, statistically and fantasy wise, is an absolute beast when considering goals scored. Bondra isn't going in, but it will be tough for whoever goalscorer to be admitted with lower goals total than Bondra : 500 goals, relatively short career, prime in the dead puck era, played most of his career with Michal Pivonka as his center... That nearly translates into a 700 goal career, should he had played between '80 and '94 with no lockouts instead of '92 to '06 (we could safely take out the last year)with two lockouts. In ... some 1100 games?
     
  20. Big Phil

    Big Phil Registered User

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2003
    Messages:
    26,992
    Likes Received:
    279
    Trophy Points:
    154
    But you cant get into the what ifs. The fact is Bondra has 892 points in 1081 games. Dead puck era or not that isnt very impressive. If he had great playoff numbers than you can ignore that. But he didnt. 56 points in 80 games isnt great either. We dont know if he could score 700 career goals in the 80s. Even then look at Ciccarelli with over 600 he isnt in. Andreychuk will get in over my dead body and Gartner with over 700 is in - although I have no bones with him.

    Bondra was fun to watch yes. But nothing stood out for him. He doesnt have that one big year or that stretch where you just have to put him over the top. His career was good but it will easily be ignored by the committee. Like I said nothing puts him over the top.
     

Share This Page

monitoring_string = "358c248ada348a047a4b9bb27a146148"