Does the Hall of Fame still hold significance to you?

[Toby91ca]

Kevin Lowe has 431 in 1254 or 0.34 PPG even after playing for dynasty for years.

He makes Marleau look like Lindros in comparison.

To be fair, you shouldn't compare a non-offensive Dman to a forward.....but make no mistake, Lowe is in the HOF solely because he won 6 cups, I can't think of any other reason.

 

[eojsmada]

Yes and no....the bar of achievement has lowered, though

 

[joestevens29]

Who is in the hall of fame vs what i think of the actual building and display are two very different questions.

To be honest who is in the hall of fame had zero impact on my experience there. I mean you look at a handful of those plaques or whatever you call them and you kinda get the idea. It's the rest of the displays that I spent my time looking at.

Lots of different things to look at that as a hockey fan and memorabilia guy that I enjoyed.

 

[Section 104]

I went there in 2012 when I spent a week in Toronto. It’s pretty decent. Doesn’t concentrate on the NHL…features on international and women’s. I haven’t been in the Baseball HOF in 40+ years but they were exclusively MLB (I suppose they have more on Negro leagues now). I went to the NFL HO 2 years ago when I was in Western PA visiting a cousin. It struck me how the NFL HOF the members room is pretty dark while HHOF is pretty airy and light.


For some reason I thought the most interesting thing was the original Stanley Cup which is what used to be a bank vault next to the members plaques. I don’t know what it is but it had the silvery glow to it. Probably made up of a different mixture of silver than the one they have you can get photographed standing next to while some poor attendant keeps reciting the same facts over and over.

I suppose people are always complaint about various halls being devalued by lower standards. Then again someone who had a small automobile Hall of Fame once commented that while you can get people to visit you once, getting them back a second, third, a fourth, etc time is the hard yet necessary part if you want to stay in business

HHOF needs to induct Paul Henderson, Don Cherry and Stan Fischer if they insist inducting on various Russians and women.

 

[BobColesNasalCavity]

Yes I’ve been there and after Dave Andreychuk made it I stopped taking it serious

 

[I Hate Blake Coleman]

Less and less each passing year.

It's got guys who are just very good.

Recchi, Andreychuk, Housley, and similar calibre players just take away from the prestige of it all.

 

[SkinsFan09]

Every sports Hall of Fame should start over and only the actual greatest players ever should get in.

 

[Canadienna]

Going to the Hall was an amazing experience, and one I definitely recommend.

Of course the Hall of Fame is still significant.

That can be eroded by mismanagement and has to some degree, but I kind of don't believe all the people saying it's entirely irrelevant because of things like Mogilny.

Obviously fans still want to see their favourite deserving superstars to get in, meaning it has significance to them. Maybe for some it's not much, but to say it's totally irrelevant is shorthand for "it's less relevant".

 

[Minnesota Knudsens]

Visited the HHOF a few years back and it’s cool, but my son absolutely loved it (at age 10). There’s some cool interactive activities and the exhibits are well done. I wouldn’t necessarily make it the focal point of a trip to TO, but it’s surrounded by a lot of other great stuff to do. Take the family to a Jays game, the CN tower/aquarium and the HHOF. I’m gonna stop now because it sounds like I work for Tourism Toronto.

 

[frisco]

Now that Foreigner are in, I'm going to go for another visit.

My Best-Carey

 

[Craig Ludwig]

To be fair, you shouldn't compare a non-offensive Dman to a forward.....but make no mistake, Lowe is in the HOF solely because he won 6 cups, I can't think of any other reason.

Larry Hillman won 6 Stanley Cups...Kevin Lowe making into the Hall of Fame is the biggest crock of "Old Boys Club" crap we have ever seen, and makes a mockery of what was once a sacred club.

TBH, The NHL Hall of Fame used to be similar to the NFL, only the best of the best. The first time they deviated that I remember was Bernie Federko, so that they could get a St. Louis Blue in there. Ever since then it is far too easy, far too many players in there.

But they stooped to an all time embarrassing "Lowe" with Kevin. Shame on them.

 

[PolishPrince21]

I don't really care that much for Skip Bayless but one thing i do agree with in regards to this view on the NFL hall of fame that carries the same principle to me with the NHL hall of fame is that if you have to think twice he isn't in, in my view.

 

[ponder]

Went a few times as a kid, it was cool then but I wouldn't bother going again. Doesn't hold much significance to me, personally.

Also for ppl saying the standards have dipped recently ... weren't there always questionable selections? Guys like Shorty Green, Dick Duff, Gillies, Cheevers, Glenn Anderson (great stats BUT he played on the 80s Oilers), etc.

 

[Cas]

Pete Rose continuing to be left out is an absolute travesty. Best hitter the game ever saw.

Maybe the best hitter the Whining or Lying Halls of Fame ever saw.

No, Pete Rose does not have an argument to be the "best hitter" in baseball history. He played forever (in part because he managed to get a managerial job) and was very durable. He was never better than an above-average hitter. Arguably the most overrated player in baseball history, and also an utter cretin, a garbage excuse for a human being, a liar, a cheat, and completely and hopelessly unworthy of respect or honor.

 

[Oilslick941611]

Never did.

 

[GMR]

Unlike in baseball, the NHL feels compelled to induct at least six people each year for their cringeworthy TV show.

That’s why so many less deserving inductions happened in recent years. They shouldn’t have stuck to any quota.

 

[Cas]

Unlike in baseball, the NHL feels compelled to induct at least six people each year for their cringeworthy TV show.

That’s why so many less deserving inductions happened in recent years. They shouldn’t have stuck to any quota.

It's worth noting that the NBHOF goes through cycles - at one point, the criteria was basically "did you have a good season while playing with Frankie Frisch."

 

[JianYang]

For sure it does.

At its core, the hockey hall of fame to me is a celebration of the game, and I don't go in there thinking about whatever the standard ought to be.

The discussion itself of who should or should not be in the Hall is more of a fun talking point but that's all I take it for.

 

[93LEAFS]

Not trying to be incendiary here for those passionate, but the thread title says most of what I want to discuss.

• Have you been there? Was it worth it?
• Do you believe the Hall of Fame's qualifications regarding player entry holds up?
  • If yes, do you think it will continue to hold up?
• Does it still have a lot of value in the modern age for everyone?
• Who are the glaring omissions or entries which weaken the quality of the Hall?
  • Which future players do you anticipate might get subbed?

I've been, but I grew up and live in Toronto. So, for me to say whether it is worth it or not is not giving much of an opinion. It's a cool option to see in Toronto if you are a hockey fan and visiting.

The Hockey Hall of Fame is a mess. They try to value peak and longevity, and then end up valuing nothing with a bunch of fringe candidates getting in. Baseball values longevity, NFL values prime/peak. Add in, it's the Hockey Hall of Fame, and not the NHL hall of fame, leads to a ton of fringe candidates.

Predicting who might get snubbed and which fringe player might get in is impossible. The HHOF tries to value everything, and in the end value little which makes their criteria suspect. Like, in Baseball you know someone like Joe Carter with iconic moments and a few all-star level seasons isn't going to get in, same with someone like Josh Donaldson because they simply don't have the career totals. In football, you know certain guys who played a long-time but weren't a DPOY, 1st or 2nd team all pros more than once likely won't get in (Robert Mathis). The NHL has a ton of guys who were there cuz they were on the right dynasty teams, got bonus points for international play outside the NHL, or had short careers but great peaks (Bure, Lindros, Neeley, etc) or stuck around long enough in a high-scoring era to put up great counting stats (Gartner, Ciccerelli, etc.).

 

[HolyHagelin]

I think it’s hilarious there is a pete rose debate in here.

Hitting includes hitting for extra bases, so no rose is not close to the best hitter ever. That’s probably Ruth, Aaron, or Bonds.

However he still belongs in the hall. So what he is a garbage person? So’s Ty Cobb.

 

[Ghetty Green]

I'm going in 2 weeks, can't wait!

 

[Cas]

I think it’s hilarious there is a pete rose debate in here.

Hitting includes hitting for extra bases, so no rose is not close to the best hitter ever. That’s probably Ruth, Aaron, or Bonds.

However he still belongs in the hall. So what he is a garbage person? So’s Ty Cobb.

Cobb was libeled by Al Stump and that somehow became the popular narrative. In the "bad human being" race, Rose beats Cobb by several laps.

As induction into the Hall of Fame is an honor, and Rose deserves no honor, no, he doesn't belong. He's ineligible, and rightly so. Baseball has been far, far too lenient towards that man over the years - he should be persona non grata, an unperson, rather than feted in Cincinnati.

 

[93LEAFS]

I'm 100% against Marleau making the HHOF but his potential inclusion and the inclusion of guys like Carbs and Lowe still won't prevent me from going and still recognizing the HHOF as the standard for excellence as far as NHL hockey goes even if they have mistakes of ommission.

He'll get in. His local market will be pushing his case, has Hockey Canada credentials, and has key counting stats (500 goals/1000 points). Did I ever watch Marleau and be like this guy is a top 10 talent in the league and he's a must for the hall of fame? No. But, the NHL is a mess. They value high peak players who were destroyed by injuries but didn't reach key point marks, and value guys who put up counting stats. While, I'm not saying which should be valued more, but pick one. The NFL values peak, MLB values longevity, NHL tries to value both and botches the overall standards.

 

[93LEAFS]

Yes, the all time hits leader is the best hitter ever. Unless you're actually going to argue Jason Heyward is better because of his slugging %.

In which case you should be barred from talking about baseball.

The only other guy that could reasonably have a case is Ty Cobb, but something tells me his slugging % isn't good enough for you to consider it.

You can make a pretty strong argument for quite a few people above Rose, but Jayson Heyward isn't one of them. For example, I'd say Bonds was a better hitter ( .006 lower on career average, 1 less batting crown, significantly higher in OBP, and way more power) and an argument exists for people like Tony Gwynn (way better batting average, 5 more batting crowns, slightly better OBP). Like, I'd say there is a way stronger argument for say Ted Williams as a better hitter than Rose. Higher average, higher on-base, way more power, etc, missed seasons due to being a fighter pilot, etc.

 

[GOilers88]

Maybe the best hitter the Whining or Lying Halls of Fame ever saw.

No, Pete Rose does not have an argument to be the "best hitter" in baseball history. He played forever (in part because he managed to get a managerial job) and was very durable. He was never better than an above-average hitter. Arguably the most overrated player in baseball history, and also an utter cretin, a garbage excuse for a human being, a liar, a cheat, and completely and hopelessly unworthy of respect or honor.

Your opinion of his character means nothing. And what he did as a manager doesn't erase what he accomplished as a hitter.

Charlie Hustle all day.

You can make a pretty strong argument for quite a few people above Rose, but Jayson Heyward isn't one of them. For example, I'd say Bonds was a better hitter ( .006 lower on career average, 1 less batting crown, significantly higher in OBP, and way more power) and an argument exists for people like Tony Gwynn (way better batting average, 5 more batting crowns, slightly better OBP). Like, I'd say there is a way stronger argument for say Ted Williams as a better hitter than Rose. Higher average, higher on-base, way more power, etc, missed seasons due to being a fighter pilot, etc.

Bonds being roided out ruins it for me.