Upcoming Hall of Fame announcement

[Snap Wilson]

Not to denigrate Dick Duff, he was one of my favorites as well, but Jesus. This really has an aura of "old boys network" written all over it. Who's next, Bob Nevin? The Metz brothers?

 

[John Flyers Fan]

Think he has 6 Stanley Cup rings. He was a very gritty player, 100% heart, kind of like Mike Peca. And keep in mind he played in an era when a point a game player was a super-star.

You're correct on the 6 cups, which certainly helps, and I understand that points aren't everything, but he certainly doesn't look like a Hall of Famer.

 

[UnderratedBrooks44]

I'm very surprised. I thought someone like Gilmour would end up getting in, even Bure and then Barrasso or Richter would sneak in. No love for the young crowd!

PS-I don't care how popular he is, Mike Emrick should not be on the board of voters.

 

[Snap Wilson]

You're correct on the 6 cups, which certainly helps, and I understand that points aren't everything, but he certainly doesn't look like a Hall of Famer.

And he wasn't! If you had suggested it at the time he was playing, people would have told you you were crazy. Of course, they would have said the same thing about Bob Pulford and Allan Stanley, too. Apparently there's a mission to induct every member of the Leafs 1960s championship teams in the Hall, except for Carl Brewer. I guess he pissed too many people off.

 

[ClassicHockey]

I'm not saying that I totally agree with this choice. I can tell you that in his early years with the Leafs, Duff was their best player. Then it seemed to me he lost something, a step or just got up for playing in the playoffs. He was a 'money' player who played his best in the playoffs. You couldn't say he was a HOF player based on the regular season. Although not big, he was a tough player who took on anyone. He is still angry to this day that the Leafs traded him in 1964. I can also tell you that he has been bitter over the past few years, believing that he belonged in the HHOF.

He almost made it last year, I think.

Carl Brewer deserves to be in the HHOF but then so do Mark Howe, Glen Anderson and a few others. If they were going to put a veteran of that era in, I would have chosen Sid Smith.

And he wasn't! If you had suggested it at the time he was playing, people would have told you you were crazy. Of course, they would have said the same thing about Bob Pulford and Allan Stanley, too. Apparently there's a mission to induct every member of the Leafs 1960s championship teams in the Hall, except for Carl Brewer. I guess he pissed too many people off.

 

[MS]

And he wasn't! If you had suggested it at the time he was playing, people would have told you you were crazy. Of course, they would have said the same thing about Bob Pulford and Allan Stanley, too. Apparently there's a mission to induct every member of the Leafs 1960s championship teams in the Hall, except for Carl Brewer. I guess he pissed too many people off.

Pretty much half the league from the 1955-65 era is in the HHOF - now 10 HHOFers on the 1962 Leafs team. It's getting to be a bit ridiculous. And while I'm not exactly an expert on the era, everything I've ever understood would indicate that Claude Provost was a head-and-shoulders better player than Dick Duff at both ends of the rink.

Really weak selection. To take Duff over Gilmour is mind-boggling. This is a player who was neither an elite amongst his peers (top-10 player in the league at any point), nor put up career numbers, nor has any sort of real lasting legacy.

Now if you're a #20-30 scorer in the regular season who turns in quality playoff perfomances, you're HHOF calibre. Good news for Claude Lemieux and Esa Tikkanen.

 

[Northern Dancer]

Pretty much half the league from the 1955-65 era is in the HHOF - now 10 HHOFers on the 1962 Leafs team. It's getting to be a bit ridiculous. And while I'm not exactly an expert on the era, everything I've ever understood would indicate that Claude Provost was a head-and-shoulders better player than Dick Duff at both ends of the rink.

Really weak selection. To take Duff over Gilmour is mind-boggling. This is a player who was neither an elite amongst his peers (top-10 player in the league at any point), nor put up career numbers, nor has any sort of real lasting legacy.

Now if you're a #20-30 scorer in the regular season who turns in quality playoff perfomances, you're HHOF calibre. Good news for Claude Lemieux and Esa Tikkanen.

He was very similiar to Gilmour only with 6 SC rings. Perhaps a weak selection but he was the cornerstone of a blockbuster trade involving Andy Bathgate. With all these things you can argue till the cows come home but the one thing he was, was being a class act and giving every inch of himself every game.

 

[Stephen]

Not to knock Hotchkiss, but wondering how much him being a member of the board member of the HHoF for the last 7 years helped him.

It must have made all the difference.

 

[God Bless Canada]

Roy was a slam dunk.

As I mentioned in my first post in this thread, there has been a tremendous swell of support to induct Herb Brooks. Not a surprise there.

Duff was one of the 10 I was thinking of. I'm not totally shocked, but I think there are better candidates among the old-times, including Provost. Based on numbers, he's not an HHOFer, but as anyone who knows the game will tell you, there's more to the game than numbers.

I just think there are better players not in the Hall than Duff: Provost, Howe, Tremblay, Brewer, Anderson, Makarov, Mikhailov and Nedomansky among them.

I'm shocked Gilmour didn't get in. 1,400 points, top 10 in all-time playoff scoring. There are only a handful who can lay claim to both. (Gretzky, Messier, Coffey, Bourque and Yzerman, I think. Maybe Trottier). Not only that, but Gilmour played such a strong all-round game, and was a strong leader.

Those left off this year now essentially have to wait for 2008. Messier, Francis, Stevens and MacInnis will comprise next year's class.

 

[discostu]

If some of the bubble guys don't get in before the this past year's big wave of retirees become eligible, I imagine they'll be waiting a long time before they get in, if at all.

Of the guys that have retired in the past year:
-Messier
-Francis
-Stevens
-MacInnis
-Robitaille
-Hull

Sure-fire guys who will probably retire within a year or two:
-Hasek
-Belfour
-Yzerman
-Chelios (ironically, the least likely to hang'em up within a year)

That's quite a few names right there, with hopefully a few European selections finally getting some due, and, there will be coaches and builders who get some slots. From what I understand, it's usually 3 or 4 selections per year. That's a few years worth of inductions right there, and then the next wave of players start coming down the pipe like Lidstrom, Forsberg, Modano, Sundin, Sakic, Jagr, etc. who may all warrant some consideration.

While people like to point to Neely as the benchmark for getting in, who got in after several attempts, in a weak induction class. Others who hope to use that comparable may have to wait a long time before those type of circumstances arise.

 

[El_Scoobo]

If some of the bubble guys don't get in before the this past year's big wave of retirees become eligible, I imagine they'll be waiting a long time before they get in, if at all.

Of the guys that have retired in the past year:
-Messier
-Francis
-Stevens
-MacInnis
-Robitaille
-Hull

Sure-fire guys who will probably retire within a year or two:
-Hasek
-Belfour
-Yzerman
-Chelios (ironically, the least likely to hang'em up within a year)

That's quite a few names right there, with hopefully a few European selections finally getting some due, and, there will be coaches and builders who get some slots. From what I understand, it's usually 3 or 4 selections per year. That's a few years worth of inductions right there, and then the next wave of players start coming down the pipe like Lidstrom, Forsberg, Modano, Sundin, Sakic, Jagr, etc. who may all warrant some consideration.

While people like to point to Neely as the benchmark for getting in, who got in after several attempts, in a weak induction class. Others who hope to use that comparable may have to wait a long time before those type of circumstances arise.

No kidding. Some of the likes of Richter, Ciccarelli and Barrasso will likely never get in now. There's just too much talent coming up. All 10 of those that you listed are getting in.

Further down the road, guys like Lidstrom, Sakic and Jagr have their tickets stamped already, as well.

Gilmour could very well get in a couple years down the road. He has met enough of the credentials imo.


I will say congrats to all of the inductees. It is a very good achievement and a great honor.

 

[reckoning]

I`m stunned Gilmour didn`t get in. It would be hard to believe he wasn`t nominated. Has the committee made a conscious decision to make first-ballot induction a "special" honour that will only happen every few years?

Nice to see Duff get in after all these years, maybe there`s still hope for Howe, Middleton, Vachon, etc. after all.

 

[God Bless Canada]

I`m stunned Gilmour didn`t get in. It would be hard to believe he wasn`t nominated. Has the committee made a conscious decision to make first-ballot induction a "special" honour that will only happen every few years?

Nice to see Duff get in after all these years, maybe there`s still hope for Howe, Middleton, Vachon, etc. after all.

I think that's an interesting point, reck. There were a lot of guys who got in on the first ballot (Murphy and Mullen come to mind) who were somewhat contentious selections. While I think next year's Big 4 will all get in (all four are arguably top 100 players in NHL history, and Messier's top 25), I think we may be witnessing the dawn of a new procedure in which only the locks get in on the first ballot. While many of us hold Gilmour as a first ballot, and many people view Bure as a first ballot, others don't think either belongs in the HHOF.

Frankly, I don't know what this HHOF class signifies. The HHOF is somewhat about timing because two voters change each year. We thought that maybe Kharlamov's selection would signify a renewed commitment to international stars. It did not. Maybe Duff's selection will signify a renewed focus for the veterans. Duff's the first Original 6-era player to be selected since Roy Conacher in 1998. (I believe that was the last year for the Veteran's Committee). Or maybe this is just an anomaly.

I think this is the sign that Anderson, Ciccarelli et al will be waiting for a very long time.

 

[19nazzy]

Congratulations to the greatest goaltender of all time.

 

[pappyline]

I'm not sure that posters here know how the Hall of Fame Induction process works.

There were no 20 'tries' for Kharlamov to finally get inducted. There may have been only one try and that got him in. Contrary to baseball, not all players who have been retired the required years are automatically up for the vote. That's because a hockey player may be eligible but if he isn't nominated to the selection committee and approved, then he is not considered that induction year at all.

In order to have a player eligible to be voted on, someone (could be anyone from the public) contacts one of the members of the selection committe with a proposal for induction. Paperwork is required (with stats, accomplishments etc.) to prove the case for the player. If that member of the committee agrees that there is a good case, then he brings it up for approval among the committee so that the player can be eligible to be voted on.

I hope that's clear enough. I don't necessarily agree with the process but the HHOF has their reasons, I'm sure.

So, if a player is not nominated by someone with the supporting info, then that player is not considered.

The question comes up about International hockey players and the same rule applies to them. I can tell you that there was supposed to be a nomination for Alexander Yakushev this year. But the list of nominees each year is guarded from the public like you wouldn't believe.

Another thing that is clear and made public is that on and off ice conduct does matter.

For years there have been complaints about people like Harold Ballard getting inducted because of their lack of morals, for the lack of a better word.

So, I hope the same people who bemoan that the Ballard types got inducted but cry because the Ciccarelli types don't, realize that you can't have it both ways.

The HHOF is trying to make things right. Its not to say guys like Ciccarelli won't be inducted but it won't be right away and won't be easy.

Of course, a lot depends on which players are eligible for the vote in a particular year. This year is weaker than next year so those players who are on the bubble have a better chance some years than others.

Boy, that is a weid process. So basically this relatively small committee on an ibdividual basis take nominations from the public and the individual committee member decides to if that player should be voted on. Then the nominee is subject to a vote by the entire committee. If there are more aye's then nayes, he gets in. This is all done in secret. No wonder we get such weird inductees. It all sounds very political to me. By the way, how does the selection committee get selected?

As far as this years inductees go, I was quite surprised. I neber heard of Hotchkiss before but in reading up on him he sounds like "a good old boy" and got in for that reason as most guys in the builder's category do.

Regarding Dick Duff, he was one of my favorites in the late 50's but no way he would be a HOFer if standards were set properly but he is certainly better than his teammate Bob Pulford.

Myself, I put no credence in the "official" HOF but love the World Wide hall of Fame.

 

[ClassicHockey]

I know of the World Wide Hall of Fame. Its a good idea but if you look at some of their nominations, you might change your mind about how competent that group is as a whole.

Boy, that is a weid process. So basically this relatively small committee on an ibdividual basis take nominations from the public and the individual committee member decides to if that player should be voted on. Then the nominee is subject to a vote by the entire committee. If there are more aye's then nayes, he gets in. This is all done in secret. No wonder we get such weird inductees. It all sounds very political to me. By the way, how does the selection committee get selected?

As far as this years inductees go, I was quite surprised. I neber heard of Hotchkiss before but in reading up on him he sounds like "a good old boy" and got in for that reason as most guys in the builder's category do.

Regarding Dick Duff, he was one of my favorites in the late 50's but no way he would be a HOFer if standards were set properly but he is certainly better than his teammate Bob Pulford.

Myself, I put no credence in the "official" HOF but love the World Wide hall of Fame.

 

[chooch*]

I know of the World Wide Hall of Fame. Its a good idea but if you look at some of their nominations, you might change your mind about how competent that group is as a whole.

Nevermind the Hockey Hall, where's Dick Duff on Ogopogo's list!!?

I remember Roy when the surprise decision was taken to start him in the 86 playoffs. Perron said he was the most stable goalie they had despite that he looked ok but not Hof calibre during the season giving up several long distance goals.

Who can forget his wink at Sandstrom, his over Tremblays shoulder talk with Corey, his save on Bob Brooke in the OT game v. Rangers 86 semis, the little string that held his plastic throat shield, and his nose especially in the early years.

The trade could be the Habs curse of ruth.

Ps. Pete Mahovlich should be in the Hall if only because he was my first favorite player and second that he was a top 5 centre for 7 years.

 

[pappyline]

I know of the World Wide Hall of Fame. Its a good idea but if you look at some of their nominations, you might change your mind about how competent that group is as a whole.

Not sure what your point is. I have looked at who the WWHHOF have elected & it sure falls more in line with my thinking than the "official HHOF".

As far as their nomination process, every one seems to eligible after 5 years of retirement but if you get less than 4 votes you are dropped, To get elected you have to get 75% of the votes.

Looking at the results, I see this group of fans as being much more competent & less political than the "official group".

 

[ClassicHockey]

I can't disagree with you more. That WWHHOF wanted to elect players like the Hanson Brothers, Marty McSorley and a host of others that did more ruin to the game. They couldn't even get Jari Kurri elected last year.

Those group of fans are nowhere close to the hockey knowledge that the HHOF selection committee has. They may be less political but hardly more competent.

Are we talking about the same group?

Have you looked at their nominations over the years?

On what basis do you agree that the Hanson or Carlson brothers deserve any votes to a Hockey Hall of Fame.

Not sure what your point is. I have looked at who the WWHHOF have elected & it sure falls more in line with my thinking than the "official HHOF".

As far as their nomination process, every one seems to eligible after 5 years of retirement but if you get less than 4 votes you are dropped, To get elected you have to get 75% of the votes.

Looking at the results, I see this group of fans as being much more competent & less political than the "official group".

 

[pappyline]

I can't disagree with you more. That WWHHOF wanted to elect players like the Hanson Brothers, Marty McSorley and a host of others that did more ruin to the game. They couldn't even get Jari Kurri elected last year.

Those group of fans are nowhere close to the hockey knowledge that the HHOF selection committee has. They may be less political but hardly more competent.

Are we talking about the same group?

Have you looked at their nominations over the years?

On what basis do you agree that the Hanson or Carlson brothers deserve any votes to a Hockey Hall of Fame.

Yeh, I certainly would not vote for the Hansons or Carlsons & I see the Hansons got a few votes as contributors but difn't come any where close to being elected.

Still, when you look at the people they actually did elect, it makes a lot of sense and at least they make their voting results public. For all we know the "official" committee may gave cast some votes for the Hansen's also but we will never know because it is "secret".

By the way IMO , Kurri is not a lock as a HOFER but I expect the WWHHOF will eventually vote him in.

 

[ClassicHockey]

Good point about the 'public' and 'private'.

I doubt very much that the HHOF committee would be senseless enough to have a vote with the Hansons on the slate. Can you imagine if the HHOF were public and they had considered those actors? They would be ridiculed throughout the hockey world. The WWHHOF would deserve the same ridicule in my opinion.

I know some of the members of the WWHOF personally and a few that are members of SIHR are serious historians of the game. But I strongly suggest that as a group, any votes in any category for the likes of the Hanson brothers and others, brings down the reputation of the group. There may be only one or two individuals in the WWHOF that make these uninformed nominations and votes but that brings the whole group down. And, simply because of some of the ridiculous choices the group makes, I don't feel its a real credible organization 'as a whole'.

Jari Kurri to me is a first time Hall of Fame player in any organization.

Glad to hear that you wouldn't vote for the Hansons either.

Yeh, I certainly would not vote for the Hansons or Carlsons & I see the Hansons got a few votes as contributors but difn't come any where close to being elected.

Still, when you look at the people they actually did elect, it makes a lot of sense and at least they make their voting results public. For all we know the "official" committee may gave cast some votes for the Hansen's also but we will never know because it is "secret".

By the way IMO , Kurri is not a lock as a HOFER but I expect the WWHHOF will eventually vote him in.

 

[Nalyd Psycho]

Tossing around the idea of voting for the Hanson brothers makes more sense than putting Dick Duff in before Boris Mikhailov.

The way I look at it. Two great picks who are probably two of the three most influential hockey people from the 80's. (Brooks is largely responsible for the boom in hockey development in the U.S. due to the miracle on ice. Roy influenced more goalies than I can fathom and turned the Q in to a goalies league. And then Gretzky would be the other.) and then, two very bad picks. One nostalgia pick and one conflict of interest. There should be a rule that no one can be inducted into the Hall until after there associations to the organization have ended. That is a huge black mark on the hall, much worse than a few votes for the Hanson brothers. And then, selecting Duff. Very good player, no doubt, played big in big games, but was not an excellent player. Was nowhere near the ability level of the top ten European players not in the Hall.

The simple fact of the matter is, the Hockey Hall of Fame is not the hockey hall of fame. It is the North American Hockey Hall of Fame, and should change it's name to reflect that.

Well, that was my opinion yesturday.

Today? **** it. Just close the whole organization down. It's a disgrace, a joke and an insult to the sport of hockey. Start over from scratch.

 

[Marcus-74]

I don´t really even bother to make a case for those European hockey legends (who never played in the NHL... in their primes) to get inducted. TOO LITTLE, TOO LATE, MATE! It seems that even a true hockey god like Kharlamov needed a... how do you say it... weak/bad/quiet year to get inducted.

Before they get some people who truly know about European hockey (history) to do the selections, I don´t really care.

And why should Yakushev get in before the likes of Mikhailov or Petrov? Because of his performance in the Summit? Yakushev was a very good player and one of the best Soviets during the ´70s but not quite the superstar North Americans make him out to be. Amen.

 

[Snap Wilson]

The World Wide Hall of Fame is an interesting look at the process, but their selections are as capricious and arbitrary as the Toronto Hockey Hall, only subtracting the detriment of needing an induction ceremony every year to support an institution.

 

[Marcus-74]

Incidently, there may be a DVD set on the 1974 Canada (WHA) - Russia - 8 game series. I wonder if that interests anyone.

Yeah, though mainly just to see the Soviets´top line playing. I also understand that Alexander Maltsev was in much better form than in ´72.

Would the picture quality (the Moscow games) be as bad as in the "Team of the century" DVD set?