Adam Oates HHOF?

[seventieslord]

So basically, if Turgeon was:

a) a little bit better offensively
b) moderately better defensively
c) much better at faceoffs
d) not nearly so injury prone
e) not quite as soft

He'd be as good as Oates?

I'm not even that big a fan of Oates; I'd induct both Bure and Lindros before him among recent snubs, but he was definitely better than Turgeon.

Pretty much.

It is like Lidstrom and Bourque. To me it is pretty clear which is better but at the same time I can see that the gap isn't huge.

It is certainly conceivable.

 

[tony d]

Oates was an elite playmaker, perhaps one of the best of his generation. I think you see him get in next year.

 

[Big Phil]

Oates should be in the HHOF no question. We can only guess which people on the committee don't want him in there. Odds are good that Harry Sinden is one of them and that carries lots of weight. As for being overrated, I can see the argument but that 45 goal 142 point season with Juneau and Kvartalnov says a lot too. (For one of only two times I can remember, 1990 being the other, the Bruins played an open style that year because they didnt have Neely but that had a strong forward corps. Of course that style went bust when Buffalo swept them out of the playoffs.) That huge year is the best microcosm of Oates' career in some ways, unquestioned HHOFER with warts.

Fill me in a bit there, why would Sinden not want Oates? He had him on the Bruins for 5 years. He traded for him and Oates' most productive season was as a Bruin. Is there something I am missing?

You might be right lol. No offense to Mark Howe or Joe Nieuwendyke but Oats should have made it in before either of those guys. Howe got in because he was very well liked, a solid NHL player, and his last name. Joe the same though was a better player and didn't have the name.

Oates was better than both. I don't get it sometimes how they select these players...

I think most of us agree Howe deserved it. He was a three time first team all-star on defense.

Joe on the other hand fits the mold of a player who was good but "oh well we liked him a lot so if we keep repeating it over and over again how great he was and that might convince people. Oh, don't forget to never go into an argument without mentioning three Cups with three teams. Our hope is that this stat will impress people so much that no one will question it."

Yeah, that type of player. With the addition of Nieuwendyk, expect Andreychuk to get the hero treatment soon enough.

 

[RECsGuy*]

With the addition of Nieuwendyk, expect Andreychuk to get the hero treatment soon enough.

If that happens, THAT will be the HHOF's new low and will effectively kill whatever credibility the institution has left.

 

[sr edler]

Bondra played with Nikolishin as his center during 1998.

nikolishin must really have worked his magic with 38 games and 10 assists

 

[pappyline]

Fill me in a bit there, why would Sinden not want Oates? He had him on the Bruins for 5 years. He traded for him and Oates' most productive season was as a Bruin. Is there something I am missing?

I remember Oates left Boston under a cloud. If I remember right, Oates was publicly critical of Boston management and shortly after Sinden got rid of him.

 

[Waltah*]

I remember Oates left Boston under a cloud. If I remember right, Oates was publicly critical of Boston management and shortly after Sinden got rid of him.

yep, oates made a comment about management while still wearing the uniform.

hey, it got us Jim Carey though

 

[begbeee]

nikolishin must really have worked his magic with 38 games and 10 assists

http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-687729.html

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

If that happens, THAT will be the HHOF's new low and will effectively kill whatever credibility the institution has left.

Eh, at least Andreychuk would be better than Dick Duff.

 

[Laphroaig]

I' m on the fence when it comes to Oates. There are certainly less accomplished players in the HOF but if everyone better than Dick Duff and Clark Gillies were to be inducted the Hall would have to double in size. A great playmaker for sure but a forward with only five 20 goal seasons is going to encounter some resistence.

 

[God Bless Canada]

yep, oates made a comment about management while still wearing the uniform.

hey, it got us Jim Carey though

It also got you Jason Allison (who had two or three terrific seasons in Boston) and Anson Carter (who had some good years for Boston, too).

I've long maintained that there's a certain point in which a guy has to be in the HHOF. If you're good enough to get 700 goals, 1,000 assists or 1,500 points, then you should be in. Oates fits that criteria.

At the same time, I don't mind the wait. Gilmour's wait bugged me. I thought he should have gone first ballot, even though he didn't hit that 1,000 assist barrier. I think Oates should have gone in by now (say, 2010, which was his fourth turn on the ballot). But I didn't have a problem with him waiting, and he's the only member of the 700 goal, 1,000 assist or 1,500 point clubs that I can say that about.

People might say he benefitted from playing with Hull, Oates and Bondra, or that he was a by-product of them. I think they really benefitted from playing with Oates. I see three distinctly different players there. It's not like he needed a specific type of player on his right side to thrive. He thrived with a trigger man, a power forward and a slick scorer. Impressive.

And I would have gone with Nieuwendyk ahead of Oates for the HHOF. I think Nieuwendyk was the better professional hockey player. Oates had better numbers. Nieuwendyk was the better pro. If I'm the GM of a contending team, and I have the choice of adding Nieuwendyk or Oates, I go with Nieuwendyk. If I'm building towards a championship, I go with Nieuwendyk. If I'm the GM of the Florida Panthers, the Columbus Blue Jackets or the Phoenix Coyotes, I go with Oates.

The more I study Nieuwendyk the player, the more I marvel at a guy who's had some unique accomplishments. He's top 10 all-time in goals for centres. He'll be top 10 for nearly another decade. He's the only one in that top 10 to win a Cup with three different teams. I don't think we give him enough credit for the tremendous goal scorer that he was. Digging deeper, he's one of three centres with at least 300 goals to have more goals than assists. Nels Stewart (who played in a completely different time when it comes to getting and awarding assists) and Garry Unger are the others in that club. (Jeff Carter's destined to join them, but that's another prediction for another time).

I don't think we realize just how unique Nieuwendyk was as a player, at the time that he played, and I think he deserves some credit for helping to change the template for the centre position. He was a centre who was better at finishing plays than making them, which, for an elite player, is incredibly rare. He had good size. He brought the quick hands and the defensive awareness that is expected of a centre. As a goal scorer, he's one of the best we'll see down the middle for a long time to come. He's not a defining player for his generation like a Forsberg or a Sakic or a Modano. But we really haven't seen many like him.

 

[seventieslord]

Nieuwendyk having more goals than assists is not only a symptom of him being a good goalscorer for a center, it is also a symptom of him being a poor playmaker for a scoring center. This is a guy who peaked at 22nd in assists - one of only two times he was even top-50 in this regard.

Oates was a better player by a country mile. Far more dominant offensively (even if you heavily value goals over assists) and comparable defensively (both get overrated in this regard due to their faceoff prowess, 2nd and 4th all-time since faceoffs were tracked). Oates was a considerably better penalty killer as well.

Their team results prove two things: one, that a team with Nieuwendyk as its second line center is a very good team with an excellent shot at the stanley cup, and two, that having Oates as your first line center was not a guarantee of a cup. Not really much of a revelation. For what it's worth (and I think it's worth a lot), Oates had 40 more points in just 5 more playoff games.

 

[SidGenoMario]

I' m on the fence when it comes to Oates. There are certainly less accomplished players in the HOF but if everyone better than Dick Duff and Clark Gillies were to be inducted the Hall would have to double in size. A great playmaker for sure but a forward with only five 20 goal seasons is going to encounter some resistence.

Why? A forward could get in by being a top-5 goal scorer of all-time and having virtually no playmaking, so why wouldn't it work in reverse?

 

[Waltah*]

I' m on the fence when it comes to Oates. There are certainly less accomplished players in the HOF but if everyone better than Dick Duff and Clark Gillies were to be inducted the Hall would have to double in size. A great playmaker for sure but a forward with only five 20 goal seasons is going to encounter some resistence.

true but 2 of those 5 seasons were 30+ and 40+

 

[begbeee]

Why? A forward could get in by being a top-5 goal scorer of all-time and having virtually no playmaking, so why wouldn't it work in reverse?

So why Bure and in lesser extent Bondra are not in?

 

[Jag68Sid87]

Nieuwendyk having more goals than assists is not only a symptom of him being a good goalscorer for a center, it is also a symptom of him being a poor playmaker for a scoring center. This is a guy who peaked at 22nd in assists - one of only two times he was even top-50 in this regard.

Oates was a better player by a country mile. Far more dominant offensively (even if you heavily value goals over assists) and comparable defensively (both get overrated in this regard due to their faceoff prowess, 2nd and 4th all-time since faceoffs were tracked). Oates was a considerably better penalty killer as well.

Their team results prove two things: one, that a team with Nieuwendyk as its second line center is a very good team with an excellent shot at the stanley cup, and two, that having Oates as your first line center was not a guarantee of a cup. Not really much of a revelation. For what it's worth (and I think it's worth a lot), Oates had 40 more points in just 5 more playoff games.

Great post. Maybe if Oates played for the Leafs he'd be in the HOF already. It's truly sad that he's not there yet.

 

[SidGenoMario]

So why Bure and in lesser extent Bondra are not in?

Longevity

 

[Drake1588]

If he played for the Leafs... and if he didn't tick off Sinden and Jacobs once upon a time. We sometimes forget how much pull the old guard has in this league, behind the scenes. Those two absolutely have the ability to keep a bubble guy out, if they're still miffed. Show of hands: Anyone think Jacobs or Sinden are the forgive-and-forget types? Me neither.

At some point, Oates gets in, if only because those guys won't be running the show forever (Jacobs is 71; Sinden is 79). People place way too much stock in first-ballot honors, I think. If a guy gets in, whether it's immediately or ten years after his first eligibility, he's still a Hall of Famer. Oates' numbers are going to stand the test of time, and age very well. He is also becoming an increasingly well-regarded member of the NHL coaching ranks. He is playing the politics a bit better than in his playing days. He'll get in.

 

[begbeee]

Longevity

Probably there can be build an argument that Bure is top5 goal scorer all-time.

 

[Jag68Sid87]

If he played for the Leafs... and if he didn't tick off Sinden and Jacobs once upon a time. We sometimes forget how much pull the old guard has in this league, behind the scenes. Those two absolutely have the ability to keep a bubble guy out, if they're still miffed. Show of hands: Anyone think Jacobs or Sinden are the forgive-and-forget types? Me neither.

At some point, Oates gets in, if only because those guys won't be running the show forever (Jacobs is 71; Sinden is 79). People place way too much stock in first-ballot honors, I think. If a guy gets in, whether it's immediately or ten years after his first eligibility, he's still a Hall of Famer. Oates' numbers are going to stand the test of time, and age very well. He is also becoming an increasingly well-regarded member of the NHL coaching ranks. He is playing the politics a bit better than in his playing days. He'll get in.

Good stuff, Drake. And I agree with all that. I just find it unfortunate that it has to come to that.

 

[Big Phil]

I remember Oates left Boston under a cloud. If I remember right, Oates was publicly critical of Boston management and shortly after Sinden got rid of him.

Makes sense. But I have heard Bob Clarke publicly claim Lindros should be in the HHOF. This is a guy who still seems to have a grudge against Lindros (I saw Clarke on Off the Record a couple of weeks ago and he still talks about Lindros' parents ina negative light). So even if you have a grudge against a player, shouldn't you be able to look past that especially after 15 years? What did Oates do, sleep with Sinden's daughter? If that's the case, doesn't it fall under the same way you would select jury duty? Should a person be on the jury if they have had run ins with the suspect in the past? Nope. This is what bothers me about the HHOF, they have no one to answer to.

I' m on the fence when it comes to Oates. There are certainly less accomplished players in the HOF but if everyone better than Dick Duff and Clark Gillies were to be inducted the Hall would have to double in size. A great playmaker for sure but a forward with only five 20 goal seasons is going to encounter some resistence.

No he wasn't a "great" goal scorer per se. He once cracked 45 goals though. And his career of 341 goals is 17 shy of Bobby Clarke. So it isn't as if he never scored goals, he was just always a pass-first player. Always.

And I would have gone with Nieuwendyk ahead of Oates for the HHOF. I think Nieuwendyk was the better professional hockey player. Oates had better numbers. Nieuwendyk was the better pro. If I'm the GM of a contending team, and I have the choice of adding Nieuwendyk or Oates, I go with Nieuwendyk. If I'm building towards a championship, I go with Nieuwendyk. If I'm the GM of the Florida Panthers, the Columbus Blue Jackets or the Phoenix Coyotes, I go with Oates.

The more I study Nieuwendyk the player, the more I marvel at a guy who's had some unique accomplishments. He's top 10 all-time in goals for centres. He'll be top 10 for nearly another decade. He's the only one in that top 10 to win a Cup with three different teams. I don't think we give him enough credit for the tremendous goal scorer that he was. Digging deeper, he's one of three centres with at least 300 goals to have more goals than assists. Nels Stewart (who played in a completely different time when it comes to getting and awarding assists) and Garry Unger are the others in that club. (Jeff Carter's destined to join them, but that's another prediction for another time).

I don't think we realize just how unique Nieuwendyk was as a player, at the time that he played, and I think he deserves some credit for helping to change the template for the centre position. He was a centre who was better at finishing plays than making them, which, for an elite player, is incredibly rare. He had good size. He brought the quick hands and the defensive awareness that is expected of a centre. As a goal scorer, he's one of the best we'll see down the middle for a long time to come. He's not a defining player for his generation like a Forsberg or a Sakic or a Modano. But we really haven't seen many like him.

Don't you think that longevity plays a huge part in Nieuwendyk's otherwise sexy numbers? 564 goals is nice but looking at it within the context it is very.........."Andreychuk-like". Put it this way, these are Nieuwendyk's top finishes in goals: 5, 5, 7, 7, 9

He never had a 30 goal season his last 9 years in the NHL. He never had a 40 goal season after his 4th season. He never had more than 50 assists in a season. Everyone seems to remember his 7th game in 2004 against Ottawa when he scored 2 goals that Lalime should have never let in. They look to his "3 Cups on three different teams" label and then assume he was a playoff god. He wasn't at all. He probably was worse than Roenick in the playoffs who is another player that gets overrated in the postseason for some reason. Nieuwendyk never had an assist in the 2004 postseason. Not one. He had 4 assists in 1989 - his first Cup win. He was 9th in scoring on New Jersey in 2003.

Put it this way, can anyone ever build a case for Nieuwendyk without talking about "3 Cups on three different teams?" If you can't then that's a big problem. That statistic is a mere novelty, nothing more. Al Arbour did it too.

I just can't see how you could put Nieuwendyk over Oates.

 

[RogerRoeper*]

If he played for the Leafs... and if he didn't tick off Sinden and Jacobs once upon a time. We sometimes forget how much pull the old guard has in this league, behind the scenes. Those two absolutely have the ability to keep a bubble guy out, if they're still miffed. Show of hands: Anyone think Jacobs or Sinden are the forgive-and-forget types? Me neither.

At some point, Oates gets in, if only because those guys won't be running the show forever (Jacobs is 71; Sinden is 79). People place way too much stock in first-ballot honors, I think. If a guy gets in, whether it's immediately or ten years after his first eligibility, he's still a Hall of Famer. Oates' numbers are going to stand the test of time, and age very well. He is also becoming an increasingly well-regarded member of the NHL coaching ranks. He is playing the politics a bit better than in his playing days. He'll get in.

Why is Burns not in? Why did it take Gilmour so many years?

 

[tjcurrie]

i am 100% on the side of oates in the HHOF. but i will say one thing: he gets too much credit for hull, neely, and bondra. (btw, this is not in reference to bambamcam-- i know you are joking) this is not to diminish oates' effect on these guys, which was positive of course. and of course it's not like they carried oates, who scored 45 goals and 142 points with joe juneau and dmitri kvartalnov on his line.

but hull played with zezel for a lot of his 72 goal season. obviously oates was there too, especially on the PP, but yeah, 72 goals and peter zezel. it's not like oates alone turned hull from a 40 goal scorer into a 50 in 50 guy.



http://www.greatesthockeylegends.com/2006/06/brett-hull.html



brett hull's season-by-season bio on http://www.hockeydraftcentral.com/1984/84117.html



hull on zezel, http://blog.mlive.com/snapshots/2009/11/former_red_wing_brett_hulls_pr.html

hull also was a 50+ goal scorer after oates left. it's a big jump from 57 to 86, but then the illustrious kevin miller and ron sutter were his centers (and, as i recall, both guys were natural wingers), while janney centered shanahan.

neely was a 50 goal scorer before oates, as we know. he was also a much more physical and devastating player before the ulf samuelsson hit in the 1991 playoffs. neely was a very talented goal scorer and while part of his productivity in '94 was because he had one of the greatest passers of all time on his line, it was also in part because he could no longer do a lot of the power forward stuff he used to do and concentrated more on playing in front of the net, hence the incredible 50 in forty-something season. i don't think he hits 50 in 50 without oates, but there were other factors.

bondra led the league in goals long before he ever played with oates. and he had a 50 goal season with joe juneau.

Thanks for posting this. I can't stand when people say, "Adam Oates made Brett Hull." One of the biggest myths out there.

Oates should be in though yes. I'm a big Dino Ciccarelli backer myself and it's ridiculous when some on here say that he shouldn't be in and use him as their benchmark ie. " If Ciccarelli is in then this guys should be in", etc. I will use Dino as a comparison though since they're both kind of comparable. Not in their game of course, but the fact that neither won anything, both were pretty consistent their entire careers, and both quietly finished up near the top in respective categories playing in the same era. Dino's being the all-time goals list and Adam's being assists and points. So this time I will say that if Ciccarelli is in, then yeah why not Oates ?

 

[Drake1588]

Agreed. I don't really see how Ciccarelli is a tough one for some people to accept. You usually have to have done more than be a one-trick pony, but if you are exceptionally strong at that one thing, it can be awfully persuasive.

Now personally, I think that everyone in the 600+ goals club gets in. Everyone in the 1,000+ assist club also gets in. In both cases, those are tremendously exclusive production lists.

Frankly, when you look at either the career assist or career points lists, Oates should be in.

He's 16th all time in points. Now, points aren't everything, but it's one very important facet. He trails only Wayne Gretzky, Mark Messier, Gordie Howe, Ron Francis, Marcel Dionne, Steve Yzerman, Mario Lemieux, Joe Sakic, Jaromir Jagr, Phil Esposito, Ray Bourque, Mark Recchi, Paul Coffey, Stan Mikita, and Bryan Trottier.

Just a matter of time for him. He'll get in. Of course, I am a believer in the merits of the compiler. It's not ONLY about the peak. Excellence combined with endurance is also worthy of HOF recognition.

It only seems easy to steadily compile points for 18-22 years until you see how many players wear out in their early 30s.

 

[jkrx]

Agreed. I don't really see how Ciccarelli is a tough one for some people to accept. You usually have to have done more than be a one-trick pony, but if you are exceptionally strong at that one thing, it can be awfully persuasive.

Now personally, I think that everyone in the 600+ goals club gets in. Everyone in the 1,000+ assist club also gets in. In both cases, those are tremendously exclusive production lists.

Frankly, when you look at either the career assist or career points lists, Oates should be in.

He's 16th all time in points. Now, points aren't everything, but it's one very important facet. He trails only Wayne Gretzky, Mark Messier, Gordie Howe, Ron Francis, Marcel Dionne, Steve Yzerman, Mario Lemieux, Joe Sakic, Jaromir Jagr, Phil Esposito, Ray Bourque, Mark Recchi, Paul Coffey, Stan Mikita, and Bryan Trottier.

Just a matter of time for him. He'll get in. Of course, I am a believer in the merits of the compiler. It's not ONLY about the peak. Excellence combined with endurance is also worthy of HOF recognition.

It only seems easy to steadily compile points for 18-22 years until you see how many players wear out in their early 30s.

Atleast Oates have the excellence of playmaking to lean on. Ciccarellis is beyond me though. I rank players like Bernie Nicholls and Theo Fleury higher.