The Ten Worst Players in the HHOF

[Canadiens1958]

That totally went over your head. What I was suggesting is that Moore was CLEARLY the better player than Andreychuk and he shouldn't be penalized for never being the best player on his team because his team was littered with HHOFers.

As for a complete game, do tell, what did Andreychuk do that was complete? He was slow as molasses, he wasn't terribly physical and he wasn't great defensively. Not a good playoff performer either. Andreychuk is in the HHOF because he hung around long enough to compile over 600 goals and even in that situation he is not elite either. Observe:

1982 to 1994 goals:
Andreychuk is 11th with 426. Behind Larmer, barely ahead of Bellows. These are more or less his peers and I think most of us overall want Larmer. Meanwhile even someone like Gartner is 2nd overall in goals during this time with 498.

Worry about things zipping past you and logical coherence over the years. Specifically recall your vapid position in the Shanahan vs Gilmour debate.

Specifically. Teams never had a hard time finding a suitable center for Shanahan regardless of where he played.

But who was the most suitable winger available for your favourite Doug Gilmour - Dave Andreychuk. Gilmour had his two best Leaf seasons with Andreychuk as his main winger. In fact 1994-95 Andreychuk outscored Gilmour. So Andreychuk simply did the job. No one else had a 50 goal season playing on the Leafs during Gilmour's tenure.

So now do you see the value and fame of Dave Andreychuk who enhanced Gilmour's numbers just like he did for other players on other teams that he played on.

 

[Nick Hansen]

Andreychuk is the one who opened the door to Patrick Marleau. Is that a good thing? I don't think so. Marleau has three top 20 finishes in points. Three. Top 20. And he's getting in, I am sure of it. Which is absurd.

 

[Big Phil]

Yes, your arguments are absolutely valid Big Guy however, the HHOF Selection Committee (and myself included when I heard he was getting in, discussed again here) weighed all of that against what he did accomplish, felt he was worthy, in. To me at least he was an excellent player even after he'd aged & was on the downslope, brought a lot of intangibles to the dressing room & game, deserving of the recognition he received with his induction into the HHOF.... Same with Duff & others who you dont think are deserving. And thats cool. Your bar is high, very demanding, I understand, respect your high standards, your absolute right to disagree. I'm not one to just blithely go along with the decisions of "The Man" or whatever authority, quite the opposite in fact in so many cases but in this case, and in the case of how the HHOF goes about the selections & inductions I'm really fine with it. Not a problem. The omissions etc as mentioned earlier, ya, for sure I'd like to see those issues addressed.

Alright very well. I just think his induction opens up a can of worms. How was he a better player than BrindAmour, Damphousse, Propp, etc. How in the world can one with a straight face on the committee think he was a better player than Fleury? Or Middleton? Or even Provost?

 

[Killion]

Alright very well. I just think his induction opens up a can of worms. How was he a better player than BrindAmour, Damphousse, Propp, etc. How in the world can one with a straight face on the committee think he was a better player than Fleury? Or Middleton? Or even Provost?

.... I hear ya Phil.... and most of those you guys you just mentioned, they need to be inducted, in.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Andreychuk is the one who opened the door to Patrick Marleau. Is that a good thing? I don't think so. Marleau has three top 20 finishes in points. Three. Top 20. And he's getting in, I am sure of it. Which is absurd.

Andreychuk did not such thing. Marleau signing as a UFA with Toronto controls his own destiny. No logical coherence to your point.

 

[Nick Hansen]

Andreychuk did not such thing. Marleau signing as a UFA with Toronto controls his own destiny. No logical coherence to your point.

The logical coherence is that their careers are very similar in terms of numbers, peak, prime and standing in the league (we'll see about Marleau winning the cup, though). Good solid players who lasted for a long time, but nothing out of the ordinary.

 

[Canadiens1958]

The logical coherence is that their careers are very similar in terms of numbers, peak, prime and standing in the league (we'll see about Marleau winning the cup, though). Good solid players who lasted for a long time, but nothing out of the ordinary.

Except Marleau played his whole career on playoff teams as a NEGATIVE player, a liability, presently career RS -6, playoffs -8. Faceoffs since stats kept 51.5%


Patrick Marleau Stats | Hockey-Reference.com

Andreychuk, playing on weaker teams, missed the playoffs 5 times, borderline often, still managed a RS +38, playoffs - 3. Faceoff stats not kept during his career.

Dave Andreychuk Stats | Hockey-Reference.com

Andreychuk also helped Doug Gilmour to his best two NHL seasons. Marleau never did likewise with another player.

Minimal, marginal similarities. Nothing congruent. No logical coherence comparing the two.

 

[Nick Hansen]

Except Marleau played his whole career on playoff teams as a NEGATIVE player, a liability, presently career RS -6, playoffs -8. Faceoffs since stats kept 51.5%

Patrick Marleau Stats | Hockey-Reference.com

Andreychuk, playing on weaker teams, missed the playoffs 5 times, borderline often, still managed a RS +38, playoffs - 3. Faceoff stats not kept during his career.

Dave Andreychuk Stats | Hockey-Reference.com

Andreychuk also helped Doug Gilmour to his best two NHL seasons. Marleau never did likewise with another player.

Minimal, marginal similarities. Nothing congruent. No logical coherence comparing the two.

Good. You're only making my case of not inducting P. Marleau stronger.

But that this is the major difference you're apparently capable of finding between Marleu and Andreychuk just makes it all the more laughable. +/-? Andrey being the key to Gilmour's seasons?

The HHOF has ruined its reputation as far as I care.

 

[Big Phil]

Worry about things zipping past you and logical coherence over the years. Specifically recall your vapid position in the Shanahan vs Gilmour debate.

Specifically. Teams never had a hard time finding a suitable center for Shanahan regardless of where he played.

But who was the most suitable winger available for your favourite Doug Gilmour - Dave Andreychuk. Gilmour had his two best Leaf seasons with Andreychuk as his main winger. In fact 1994-95 Andreychuk outscored Gilmour. So Andreychuk simply did the job. No one else had a 50 goal season playing on the Leafs during Gilmour's tenure.

So now do you see the value and fame of Dave Andreychuk who enhanced Gilmour's numbers just like he did for other players on other teams that he played on.

I have been on these boards for 14 years and I have never heard someone credit Andreychuk for Gilmour's big years. It is completely the opposite and if you don't believe me, look at the stats. Andreychuk never had more than 41 goals in a season without Gilmour and he gets two 50 goal seasons with him. He is not on pace for 50 goals in 1993 but then a trade to Toronto sees him bag 25 goals in 31 games. Gilmour had 127 points that year and would have been around there regardless of Andreychuk. Look at his early season success. He's still racking up the points. It isn't as if Andreychuk didn't help, because even Gretzky benefitted from Messier around, but to watch the games and to know hockey you clearly should know the bread and butter of that team was Gilmour.

Andreychuk is the only player to hit 50 goals during Gilmour's time as a Leaf? Huh? That's his call to fame? Three Leaf players in history have hit 50 goals and none of them were even Frank Mahovlich. Do we start pumping up the careers of Rick Vaive and Gary Leeman now? And as for Andreychuk outscoring Gilmour in 1995, who cares? He had 5 more points than him in a lockout shortened season after Gilmour's knee injury. Sorry, not a Hall of Famer because of that.

Gilmour has three or 4 seasons better than Andreychuk's best. He was better defensively, so much better in the playoffs that it isn't worth comparing and there isn't a single GM that would have taken Andreychuk over Killer. None.

 

[Big Phil]

Specifically recall your vapid position in the Shanahan vs Gilmour debate.

I do recall that debate and yours and my position. I picked Gilmour. In that situation you always want the dominant centre over the winger. Shanahan was a fine player, I have no issue with him in the HHOF. I start my team with Gilmour though over him and Gilmour has at least three seasons better than Shanny's best. Individually he was the better player and the more dominant player and this is not taking away from Shanahan's career.

 

[Big Phil]

.... I hear ya Phil.... and most of those you guys you just mentioned, they need to be inducted, in.

To be fair, I didn't name them as a way of endorsing them to get in. The ones I named that I would personally put in are Fleury and Middleton. The ones I keep out are Propp, Damphousse and BrindAmour. Not to mention others similar like Tocchet, Bellows, Weight, etc. All along the same lines and have about the same career value as Andreychuk. We are basically inducting a guy who hung around long enough with painful 30 point years to put up numbers that the HHOF found sexy enough without looking up the context. This bodes well for Chris Osgood and Patrick Marleau and for that matter Nicholls, Turgeon and others, but it does lower the bar.

 

[Killion]

To be fair, I didn't name them as a way of endorsing them to get in. The ones I named that I would personally put in are Fleury and Middleton. The ones I keep out are Propp, Damphousse and BrindAmour. Not to mention others similar like Tocchet, Bellows, Weight, etc. All along the same lines and have about the same career value as Andreychuk. We are basically inducting a guy who hung around long enough with painful 30 point years to put up numbers that the HHOF found sexy enough without looking up the context. This bodes well for Chris Osgood and Patrick Marleau and for that matter Nicholls, Turgeon and others, but it does lower the bar.

Beyond Andreychuk, who else would you evict from your HHOF (or have never inducted in the first place) Phil?... Or did you already post a list thereof?... Im guessin it would include the Usual Suspects & as Ive stated, your right to set the bar as high as you'd like. Me?.... No problems with Dave Andreychuk, Dick Duff etc. Appreciated them as players, what they brought to the game, and while certainly not "Superstars" nor even at times the "Brightest Stars" even on their own teams they did at various times raise their games up to heights that eclipsed even the brightest stars, and for that they should be remembered & honored IMHO. Your allowed to disagree. Just dont be getting in my face or anyone elses about it, agree to disagree politely, civilly... and were all good to go yes?

 

[Canadiens1958]

I have been on these boards for 14 years and I have never heard someone credit Andreychuk for Gilmour's big years. It is completely the opposite and if you don't believe me, look at the stats. Andreychuk never had more than 41 goals in a season without Gilmour and he gets two 50 goal seasons with him. He is not on pace for 50 goals in 1993 but then a trade to Toronto sees him bag 25 goals in 31 games. Gilmour had 127 points that year and would have been around there regardless of Andreychuk. Look at his early season success. He's still racking up the points. It isn't as if Andreychuk didn't help, because even Gretzky benefitted from Messier around, but to watch the games and to know hockey you clearly should know the bread and butter of that team was Gilmour.

Andreychuk is the only player to hit 50 goals during Gilmour's time as a Leaf? Huh? That's his call to fame? Three Leaf players in history have hit 50 goals and none of them were even Frank Mahovlich. Do we start pumping up the careers of Rick Vaive and Gary Leeman now? And as for Andreychuk outscoring Gilmour in 1995, who cares? He had 5 more points than him in a lockout shortened season after Gilmour's knee injury. Sorry, not a Hall of Famer you of that.

Gilmour has three or 4 seasons better than Andreychuk's best. He was better defensively, so much better in the playoffs that it isn't worth comparing and there isn't a single GM that would have taken Andreychuk over Killer. None.

Fourteen years-wow. Also makes you very predictable. Knew you would try to bluff your way thru so I came prepared. Actually crunched the numbers.

Before the Andreychuk trade Gilmour was scoring at a 1.377 PPG pace. After the Andreychuk trade with significant TOI with DA, Gilmour scored at a 1.677 PPG pace despite being blanked in his last four RS games. Without Andreychuk Gilmour is on a 116 point pace. Probably less since the big body of Andreychuk spiked the Leafs PP.

So Andreychuk definitely helped Gilmour. Andreychuk also benefited.

The issue is not Andreychuk vs Gilmour so do not move the goalposts as you usually do. Nor is it who a GM would take. Simply it shows that a smart GM added Andreychuk, an ideal winger for Gilmour. The team and the players benefited. Both are HHOF worthy.

 

[blogofmike]

It makes sense that Dave Andreychuk would be helpful to a team's PP success. Andreychuk very probably helped Gilmour's point totals, but it should also be noted that the Leafs received an extra 1.2 PP opportunities per game after Andreychuk joined the team, so Gilmour's PPG would likely have increased slightly with or without Andreychuk thanks in part to A) Toronto having an extra powerplay every game, and B) Gilmour having a larger share of Toronto's PP.

Furthermore, the Leafs PP improvement with Andreychuk is unknown. The pre-Andreychuk numbers are weighed down by weak numbers from the early part of the year. In the month or so immediately before Andreychuk's arrival, Toronto's PP was better than it was with Andreychuk to close the year (by roughly 2.5%). The Leafs powerplay had apparently figured things out after the slow start before they acquired Andreychuk.

All that said, Andreychuk was a good addition for Toronto. Though I will say even as his goal scoring vanished by the CCF against LA, Gilmour kept producing.

 

[Canadiens1958]

It makes sense that Dave Andreychuk would be helpful to a team's PP success. Andreychuk very probably helped Gilmour's point totals, but it should also be noted that the Leafs received an extra 1.2 PP opportunities per game after Andreychuk joined the team, so Gilmour's PPG would likely have increased slightly with or without Andreychuk thanks in part to A) Toronto having an extra powerplay every game, and B) Gilmour having a larger share of Toronto's PP.

Furthermore, the Leafs PP improvement with Andreychuk is unknown. The pre-Andreychuk numbers are weighed down by weak numbers from the early part of the year. In the month or so immediately before Andreychuk's arrival, Toronto's PP was better than it was with Andreychuk to close the year (by roughly 2.5%). The Leafs powerplay had apparently figured things out after the slow start before they acquired Andreychuk.

All that said, Andreychuk was a good addition for Toronto. Though I will say even as his goal scoring vanished by the CCF against LA, Gilmour kept producing.

Thank you for the opportunity to expand on my points. As usual your numbers fail when vetted. Caught you initially on 1940s goalies SV% and a few times since.

A big body in front of the net draws penalties. That slipped by it seems. Also creates space. Andreychuk was the big body. Early season Leafs did not have the big body presence.

Simple before and after issue, not a small sample space question where a spike occurs due to weak PK by the opposition. Leafs scored 98 PP goals that year. 61 in 53 games before Andreychuk. 37 in 31 games with Andreychuk. Or a bump from 1.15 PPG/G to 1.19, more than 2.5%.

You raise the playoffs. Leafs scored 17PPG in 21 games. Check the defencemen of the opposition and their ability to play a "Big Body" in front of the net.

Detroit had Lidstrom, Chaisson and Konstantinov. St. Louis, the weakest, had Garth Butcher. LA had Blake, Sydor, Huddy, McSorley. Explains why LA was the most successful. Andreychuk did not score as much but definitely created space for Gilmour and the other Leafs to score.

 

[Big Phil]

Beyond Andreychuk, who else would you evict from your HHOF (or have never inducted in the first place) Phil?... Or did you already post a list thereof?... Im guessin it would include the Usual Suspects & as Ive stated, your right to set the bar as high as you'd like. Me?.... No problems with Dave Andreychuk, Dick Duff etc. Appreciated them as players, what they brought to the game, and while certainly not "Superstars" nor even at times the "Brightest Stars" even on their own teams they did at various times raise their games up to heights that eclipsed even the brightest stars, and for that they should be remembered & honored IMHO. Your allowed to disagree. Just dont be getting in my face or anyone elses about it, agree to disagree politely, civilly... and were all good to go yes?

I'd have kept some guys out. Not just players but even some owners and coaches and GMs that just don't fit. Pat Burns got support as soon as it was revealed he was dying. I liked Burns, but he wore out his welcome in every city he coached. What was he, a Habs, Leafs, or Bruins coach? Or Devils? Hard to say when you don't exceed 4 years on a team. He doesn't fit in the stream of Hall of Fame coaches.

The players? Many of the usual suspects. Ones that just don't fall into the category of "great". Andreychuk was never "great".

I have to ask though, you mentioned Andreychuk as someone who raised his game to heights that even the brightest stars didn't reach. When was this? Duff too you mentioned. May as well throw in guys like Gillies. I am interested in when you are thinking this happened.

 

[Big Phil]

Fourteen years-wow. Also makes you very predictable. Knew you would try to bluff your way thru so I came prepared. Actually crunched the numbers.

Before the Andreychuk trade Gilmour was scoring at a 1.377 PPG pace. After the Andreychuk trade with significant TOI with DA, Gilmour scored at a 1.677 PPG pace despite being blanked in his last four RS games. Without Andreychuk Gilmour is on a 116 point pace. Probably less since the big body of Andreychuk spiked the Leafs PP.

So Andreychuk definitely helped Gilmour. Andreychuk also benefited.

The issue is not Andreychuk vs Gilmour so do not move the goalposts as you usually do. Nor is it who a GM would take. Simply it shows that a smart GM added Andreychuk, an ideal winger for Gilmour. The team and the players benefited. Both are HHOF worthy.

Bill Guerin helped Sidney Crosby in 2009, so what? Do you know the long list of players that were an extra piece to the puzzle? Lots. Andreychuk was a "good" player and what I would call a good piece. That doesn't make him a great player or a Hall of Famer. If so, you'd better open the doors for many others.

Your arguments are weak to make Andreychuk a legit HHOFer. When was he individually great? Could he carry a team like Gilmour? Never. You needed a better forward on your team than him if you wanted to be successful.

You've ignored the glaring problems of him never being a top 20 player in the game at any time. That's a huge issue. How can you be in the Hall of Fame if you were never even revered at a high level when you played?

 

[Canadiens1958]

Bill Guerin helped Sidney Crosby in 2009, so what? Do you know the long list of players that were an extra piece to the puzzle? Lots. Andreychuk was a "good" player and what I would call a good piece. That doesn't make him a great player or a Hall of Famer. If so, you'd better open the doors for many others.

Your arguments are weak to make Andreychuk a legit HHOFer. When was he individually great? Could he carry a team like Gilmour? Never. You needed a better forward on your team than him if you wanted to be successful.

You've ignored the glaring problems of him never being a top 20 player in the game at any time. That's a huge issue. How can you be in the Hall of Fame if you were never even revered at a high level when you played?

As a player Gilmour had a Pat Burns type shelf life. Which team does Gilmour represent? Arguing both sides again. No logical coherence to your stance.

Also you always fail to address the key issue. You hide behind adjectives like great, Top 20, legit, etc. Ignoring the key common ground. Was the honouree "Worthy". Burns, Gilmour, Andreychuk, though hockey nomads were worthy.

 

[Big Phil]

As a player Gilmour had a Pat Burns type shelf life. Which team does Gilmour represent? Arguing both sides again. No logical coherence to your stance.

Also you always fail to address the key issue. You hide behind adjectives like great, Top 20, legit, etc. Ignoring the key common ground. Was the honouree "Worthy". Burns, Gilmour, Andreychuk, though hockey nomads were worthy.

But Gilmour was a great centre, I don't think Burns was a great coach. Gilmour isn't whose induction is in question though, it would be very interesting to find someone who had a problem with him in the HHOF because I'd like to hear it.

As for Andreychuk, yeah, you know, you sort of have to look at the time he spent in the NHL and his quality of play. It was never elite. That's how you judge a player, by their career. You think I am "hiding" behind the fact he was never a top 20 player, but that's pretty hard to ignore if you ask me. How about the fact that his position was weak during his career and was never a 1st or 2nd team all-star. He was 3rd twice, and 4th twice. This was not in a logjam at centre either, it was on left wing. He doesn't pass the eye test either. It isn't as if he was a better player than his numbers suggest. The last 12 years of his career he hit 50 points twice. The guy took a nosedive after the 1994 season and never did anything of note in his 30s all the while was never truly great in his 20s.

What more do you want me to explain? Look at the list of left wingers who the voters felt had better seasons than him year in and year out. You know what you'll find? Hall of "Very Good" players. So why give Andreychuk the pass? Because he hung around long enough to reach a shiny number? He didn't
even do it the right way.

 

[Big Phil]

Phil Esposito has said that he doesn't think much of the HHOF anymore because they put people in that didn't deserve it in the first place and this was from his 2003 book. Shouldn't a 5-time scoring champ be taken seriously?

 

[Killion]

Phil Esposito has said that he doesn't think much of the HHOF anymore because they put people in that didn't deserve it in the first place and this was from his 2003 book. Shouldn't a 5-time scoring champ be taken seriously?

... and the Rolling Stones have sold over 240 Million records, nearly 50 Million more than their nearest competitors... does that mean we should allow Mick & Keef to dictate to the Rock n' Roll Hall of Fame who should get in or not, who should be on the ballot & who shouldnt?.... Who the Hell is Phil Esposito to be appointing himself arbiter of who gets in & who doesnt, thats he's "disappointed" in the HHOF's selections like he's some all knowing Hockey Savant, the Last Word.... You know what? That guy was born without any Speed Bumps between his brain & his mouth & apparently at times.... his zipper. "Trader Phil". Ya. Real astute judge of hockey talent. Please.

 

[Big Phil]

... and the Rolling Stones have sold over 240 Million records, nearly 50 Million more than their nearest competitors... does that mean we should allow Mick & Keef to dictate to the Rock n' Roll Hall of Fame who should get in or not, who should be on the ballot & who shouldnt?.... Who the Hell is Phil Esposito to be appointing himself arbiter of who gets in & who doesnt, thats he's "disappointed" in the HHOF's selections like he's some all knowing Hockey Savant, the Last Word.... You know what? That guy was born without any Speed Bumps between his brain & his mouth & apparently at times.... his zipper. "Trader Phil". Ya. Real astute judge of hockey talent. Please.

It goes to show you that there probably is more all-time greats that feel that way but just don't say it. Esposito will say that sort of stuff. Is he wrong? I don't think he is. But I'll tell you a story, when I visited Cooperstown recently and saw the Baseball Hall of Fame yet again I talked with one of their staff. He talked about Pete Rose with me. He said that there would be a lot of honoured members that would be furious if they ever induct Rose. So it goes to show you that they may not control things, but that there are players that get in that they don't approve of. The players got Eagleson taken out didn't they? Right or wrong, they do have some pull. I know if I were an all-time great I might want it to be more exclusive than the format they use now that is similar to Oprah ("You get a car, You get a car too............")

 

[Killion]

It goes to show you that there probably is more all-time greats that feel that way but just don't say it. Esposito will say that sort of stuff. Is he wrong? I don't think he is. But I'll tell you a story, when I visited Cooperstown recently and saw the Baseball Hall of Fame yet again I talked with one of their staff. He talked about Pete Rose with me. He said that there would be a lot of honoured members that would be furious if they ever induct Rose. So it goes to show you that they may not control things, but that there are players that get in that they don't approve of. The players got Eagleson taken out didn't they? Right or wrong, they do have some pull. I know if I were an all-time great I might want it to be more exclusive than the format they use now that is similar to Oprah ("You get a car, You get a car too............")

Sorry Phil, but I find it inappropriate & offensive for a player (and particularly for one who is enshrined in the HHOF) to criticize the HHOF Selection Committee's decisions & a new crop of inductee's publicly the way that Esposito has done. Appallingly no class thing to be saying. Eagleson on the other hand as we all know, entirely different situation... over a dozen players threatened to resign from the HHOF if Eagleson wasnt expelled, including Brad Park, Bobby Orr, Andy Bathgate, Jean Beliveau, Mike Bossy, Johnny Bucyk, Ted Lindsay, Henri Richard, Johnny Bower, Darryl Sittler & Dickie Moore..... still supporting Eagleson right through Conviction & Sentencing... Bobby Clarke, Bob Gainey & Marcel Dionne. Maybe they should be "expelled"? Why would you want to have anything to do with much less "support" a guy who betrayed generations of players? Where was Phil Esposito through all this, still in bed with the Japanese Yakuza?. Maybe he should be booted out for that. Known Mob Associate. Guilt by association. Slippery slope. Where does it end?... So for an older player to come along & beak off about how the HHOF "aint what it used to be" is to me the height of disrespect. Who the Hell does this guy think he is?

And frankly.... my patience is running thin with this thread. I find it the height of bad taste tbh. Maybe I'm just an old Fuddy Duddy who feels we should respect those inducted & the decisions made by the various Committee's over the years. Its ok if you disagree with whatever induction but to outright reject, be unable to comprehend why the decisions were made while denigrating the careers of some great & wonderful players... I just dont get it... not diggin it....

 

[Big Phil]

Sorry Phil, but I find it inappropriate & offensive for a player (and particularly for one who is enshrined in the HHOF) to criticize the HHOF Selection Committee's decisions & a new crop of inductee's publicly the way that Esposito has done. Appallingly no class thing to be saying. Eagleson on the other hand as we all know, entirely different situation... over a dozen players threatened to resign from the HHOF if Eagleson wasnt expelled, including Brad Park, Bobby Orr, Andy Bathgate, Jean Beliveau, Mike Bossy, Johnny Bucyk, Ted Lindsay, Henri Richard, Johnny Bower, Darryl Sittler & Dickie Moore..... still supporting Eagleson right through Conviction & Sentencing... Bobby Clarke, Bob Gainey & Marcel Dionne. Maybe they should be "expelled"? Why would you want to have anything to do with much less "support" a guy who betrayed generations of players? Where was Phil Esposito through all this, still in bed with the Japanese Yakuza?. Maybe he should be booted out for that. Known Mob Associate. Guilt by association. Slippery slope. Where does it end?... So for an older player to come along & beak off about how the HHOF "aint what it used to be" is to me the height of disrespect. Who the Hell does this guy think he is?

And frankly.... my patience is running thin with this thread. I find it the height of bad taste tbh. Maybe I'm just an old Fuddy Duddy who feels we should respect those inducted & the decisions made by the various Committee's over the years. Its ok if you disagree with whatever induction but to outright reject, be unable to comprehend why the decisions were made while denigrating the careers of some great & wonderful players... I just dont get it... not diggin it....

Esposito hated Eagleson from the get go. He and Bobby Orr used to get into arguments over this according to Espo's book. Orr of course supported him at the time when he first came in. Esposito and some members of Team Canada stole Eagleson's turkey out of his personal fridge in 1972 in Russia when they were struggling themselves to find a decent restaurant. No, he didn't like the guy. But that is irrelevant.

Why can't a player voice his opinion on the standards of the HHOF? He's a member, doesn't he have that right?

As for not understanding why some get elected, I understand, I just don't see the logic. I can tell the committee is becoming completely obsessed with numbers that they are being blinded by what type of players these guys actually were at one point. A guy known for goal scoring was only a top 20 scorer twice? Not good. So on that note welcome aboard Patrick Marleau!

No, the HHOF committee has made some mistakes and threads like this discuss it. How do I know that they have? Because they don't even disclose how a player got elected. It is 18 guys who should know better that decide on this. They ought to go the Baseball route so that there is some accountability. Some things just don't make sense. In 2000 Dale Hawerchuk is eligible for the first time but he's not good enough but then all of the sudden he is in 2001? Huh? No, there wasn't a logjam in 2000, there was room to induct him. Yes I think there are some unanswered questions within the committee.

 

[a79krgm]

Never was a big fan of Dick Duff getting in. But, that's an old argument that's been done to death I think.

The Puck Stops Here: Why Dick Duff Is A Poor Hall of Fame Choice