Teemu Selanne = Hall of Fame?

[hockeyfan125]

easily.

 

[PoutinePourMoi]

I am biased because the Ducks made me like hockey as a kid. I loved Selanne and Kariya. I think he is talented enough, and has done enough to go to the hall of fame. I just wish he won a cup.

 

[Snap Wilson]

Can we leave the nationalist arguments out of this? "Second best Finnish player." Who gives a ****? Rumun Ndur is the best player to come out of Nigeria. Let's induct him!

I don't know if Selanne will make the Hall of Fame. I don't know if he should, but he wouldn't lower the standards any. He was a better player than Mike Gartner, to name a similiar guy that's already in.

 

[007]

Selänne will make the HoF for a bunch of good reasons (individual trophies, overall reputation, that rookie year) and for several controversial reasons:

1) The bar for making the HoF is quite low: Gartner it can be argued made it because of his contributions to the game off the ice as well as on, but there are a lot of players in the Hall who, while they are well-loved and well-remembered, shouldn't be there according to some of the purists on this board. In a sense, I agree with them, but we're not the ones voting.

2) It can be argued that Selänne never improved his game for the playoffs. Here's the counter-argument: when you are head-and-shoulders above the level of everyone else on your team, when they ride you INTO the playoffs in the first place, how much higher can you raise your game? For all the great playoff performers, I can't think of any teams who have been able to ride a single player (except a hot goalie) deep into the playoffs. Teemu didn't make any playoff teams successful, but he did get several non-playoff teams into the post season. Elevating your game for the playoffs is a default setting for a lot of people, but quite frankly, it's a result of a lot of factors, individual brilliance isn't necessarily enough. You can argue this one all day and night, and mostly, people aren't going to change their minds.

3) He's the most talented, and 2nd-greatest Finnish player ever. I don't think it's a good argument, but it will be a factor, whether you like it or not.

I would like for his international career to get taken into account. The HoF should be about hockey, not just the NHL. Generally, you don't have to include performance in European leagues, because they are not on the level of the NHL. You also don't have to include performance in the WC, because that isn't on the highest level, either. But in the NHL-Olympics, he has been magnificent and I would like that to be taken into account, even though it won't be.

 

[God Bless Canada]

Selänne will make the HoF for a bunch of good reasons (individual trophies, overall reputation, that rookie year) and for several controversial reasons:

1) The bar for making the HoF is quite low: Gartner it can be argued made it because of his contributions to the game off the ice as well as on, but there are a lot of players in the Hall who, while they are well-loved and well-remembered, shouldn't be there according to some of the purists on this board. In a sense, I agree with them, but we're not the ones voting.

2) It can be argued that Selänne never improved his game for the playoffs. Here's the counter-argument: when you are head-and-shoulders above the level of everyone else on your team, when they ride you INTO the playoffs in the first place, how much higher can you raise your game? For all the great playoff performers, I can't think of any teams who have been able to ride a single player (except a hot goalie) deep into the playoffs. Teemu didn't make any playoff teams successful, but he did get several non-playoff teams into the post season. Elevating your game for the playoffs is a default setting for a lot of people, but quite frankly, it's a result of a lot of factors, individual brilliance isn't necessarily enough. You can argue this one all day and night, and mostly, people aren't going to change their minds.

3) He's the most talented, and 2nd-greatest Finnish player ever. I don't think it's a good argument, but it will be a factor, whether you like it or not.

I would like for his international career to get taken into account. The HoF should be about hockey, not just the NHL. Generally, you don't have to include performance in European leagues, because they are not on the level of the NHL. You also don't have to include performance in the WC, because that isn't on the highest level, either. But in the NHL-Olympics, he has been magnificent and I would like that to be taken into account, even though it won't be.

Gartner's in the Hall because he did something that nobody else in the history of the game has done. He scored 30-goals in 15 consecutive seasons to start his career, had the streak interrupted by the 1994-95 lockout, and then had two more 30-goal seasons. Gretzky and Howe couldn't match it. Nobody could. Even if Jagr does wind up breaking Gartner's record, this is still going to go down as one of hockey's most enduring and endearing accomplishments. It's sort of like Curtis Martin's run of 1,000-yard rushing seasons in the NFL. Consistency is of great importance, and in Gartner's case, his was unprecented, a sign of greatness and the reason he's in the HHOF.

As for Selanne's playoff record. To reiterate my previous claim: I'm not worried about whether he won. It's hard to soar with eagles when your surrounded by turkeys (not to say the 1996-1999 Ducks were turkeys), but he was never on a team that had a legitimate shot of getting past the second round of the playoffs. (Except for Colorado in 2004, but he was hurt). I'm concerned about whether he takes his play to the next level in the playoffs. Guys like Gretzky, Lemieux, Orr, Esposito, Howe, Richard and Beliveau are top 10 all-time players. But one of the reasons they're so revered is they had that knack for elevating their play in the playoffs, which is far and away when the most important hockey is played. It is a sign of greatness. (Not the only sign, but a sign). Selanne never did that.

The HHOF has made a lot of mistakes over the years. A lot of those can be traced back to the now-extinct veterans committe. (Leo Boivin, anyone?) Gillies and to a lesser extent Federko were mistakes as well, but that was in 2002. By the time Selanne's first chance rolls around (2009 at the earliest, but likely much later, because I don't see him retiring this summer) 14 of the 18 people responsible for inducting Gillies will be off the selection committee. You will have a new selection committee, with new standards, and hopefully tougher standards. It's unlikely they'll gloss over Selanne's inability to elevate his play in the playoffs. The "Selanne should be in there because Gillies is in there" argument becomes moot.

 

[Mogo]

<< points at topic

 

[BM67]

Gartner's in the Hall because he did something that nobody else in the history of the game has done. He scored 30-goals in 15 consecutive seasons to start his career, had the streak interrupted by the 1994-95 lockout, and then had two more 30-goal seasons. Gretzky and Howe couldn't match it. Nobody could. Even if Jagr does wind up breaking Gartner's record, this is still going to go down as one of hockey's most enduring and endearing accomplishments. It's sort of like Curtis Martin's run of 1,000-yard rushing seasons in the NFL. Consistency is of great importance, and in Gartner's case, his was unprecented, a sign of greatness and the reason he's in the HHOF.

Comparing 30 goals in the 80's to 30 goals at almost any other time in NHL history is ridiculous. There were almost as many 30 goal scorers in Gartner's rookie year of 1979-80, than there were in Howe's first 15 years in the league.

30+ goal scorers 46-47 - 60-61: 59 of which 9 were Gordie Howe
30+ goal scorers 79-80: 54
30+ goal scorers 80-81: 55
30+ goal scorers 81-82: 75

Being consistently good is not greatness.

 

[RorschachWJK]

<< points at topic

In a few years you'll know what crow tastes like.

 

[Sampe]

Selänne will be in the Hall because he did something that nobody else in the history of the game has done. He scored 76 goals in 84 games to start his career, including not just a rookie but an NHL record 20 goals in one month, and then had two more 50-goal seasons. Gretzky and Howe couldn't match it. Nobody could. Even if Ovechkin does wind up breaking Selänne's record (and I seriously doubt it), this is still going to go down as one of hockey's most impressive and astonishing accomplishments.... goal scoring is of great importance, and in Selänne's case, his was unprecedented, a sign of greatness and the reason he'll be in the HHOF.

There, fixed it for you.

IMO, the HHOF should be for players you will tell your grandchildren about. Selänne fits that description a lot better than Gartner.

 

[God Bless Canada]

There, fixed it for you.

IMO, the HHOF should be for players you will tell your grandchildren about. Selänne fits that description a lot better than Gartner.

You wasted your time doing that? Very low class. At least I had an intelligent, respectful argument with MS.

 

[Shane]

I wasn't sure when I went into this thread, but MS has convinced me.

Same here.

 

[Sampe]

You wasted your time doing that? Very low class. At least I had an intelligent, respectful argument with MS.

Didn't mean to offend you, I just felt like choosing a different way (for myself) of demonstrating the flaw in your reasoning.

Gartner doesn't deserve to be in the Hall simply because he did something unprecedented any more than Selänne does. And like BM67 said, you have to take overall scoring into consideration. That's precisely why Selänne's rookie season was not his career year.

 

[jamiebez]

IMO, the HHOF should be for players you will tell your grandchildren about. Selänne fits that description a lot better than Gartner.

I realize that's totally subjective reasoning, but I agree with you 100%. Even though the statistical argument is a good one for Selanne, I think a lot gets lost when we focus so strongly on it.

 

[God Bless Canada]

Didn't mean to offend you, I just felt like choosing a different way (for myself) of demonstrating the flaw in your reasoning.

Gartner doesn't deserve to be in the Hall simply because he did something unprecedented any more than Selänne does. And like BM67 said, you have to take overall scoring into consideration. That's precisely why Selänne's rookie season was not his career year.

And nowhere did I say that Selanne's best year was his rookie year. IMO, his best was 1997-98, when he basically carried his team on his back for nearly two-thirds of the season. (The only time he didn't was when Kariya was in the lineup in December and January, and when Selanne was injured). There's more to evaluating a player's season than statistics.

Not all records are created equal, and there's a world of difference between single season and career records in the eyes of HHOF voters. Andreychuk is the all-time leader in power play goals, but that won't be enough to get him into the Hall. Nichols is one of only five or six players to have 150 points in a season. He won't get in. But Gartner's record is one of the most endearing and respected in the game. 700 goals is the plateau that players now have to reach to guarantee enshrinement. Gartner was also in the THN all-time Top 100 players, and one of the most disputed top 50 omissions.

Selanne just did not have a long enough tenure as one of the game's elite, or enough seasons among the regular season elite, to overcome his very spotty playoff performances. Playoffs count big-time to the HHOF voters. That's why Neely's in the Hall. If Neely had Selanne's playoff record (or that of a Sundin or Lindros, for example), Neely would not have been inducted. My "no" is not an unequivocal "no," like it is for Bondra or Turgeon, it's an "as of right now, no," much like it is for Lindros and Joseph. If anyone of these players can get that missing piece or two for their portfolio (a dominant playoff from the first game to the last, in which they carry their team on their back and elevate their play, or one or two more regular seasons among the elite) I would have no problem with Selanne (or Lindros or Joseph, for that matter).

 

[Sampe]

While stats are far from exact science, I decided to play around with some numbers just for the heck of it.

Assuming Teemu Selänne had been born exactly 11 years earlier in 1959 (making him about 4 months older than Mike Gartner for instance) and based on the overall scoring in the NHL (each season calculated separately), this is roughly how his stats would have looked like:

1981-82...............80.80+59=139..........(compared to 1992-93)
1982-83...............51.30+34=64............(93-94)
1983-84...............45.29+34=63............(94-95)
1984-85...............79.50+84=134..........(95-96)
1985-86...............78.69+79=148..........(96-97)
1986-87...............73.73+47=120..........(97-98)
1987-88...............75.66+85=151..........(98-99)
1988-89...............79.45+71=116..........(99-00)
1989-90...............73.44+52=96............(00-01)
1990-91...............80.37+32=69............(01-02)
1991-92...............80.36+42=82............(02-03)
1992-93...............78.22+23=45............(03-04)

Career stats: 871 games, 581 goals, 1227 points excluding the current season.

 

[Czech Your Math]

Another streak of consistency:

If playoff stats are included, Jagr has 30 points AND 40 assists in each of his 15 NHL seasons.

 

[Czech Your Math]

Oops... make that 30 goals AND 40 assists in each season.

Selanne's a HOF in my book.