Adam Oates HHOF?

[tjcurrie]

Which seasons are you picking from? So let's take 1993 and 1991 away from Oates. I guess those would be his best seasons. Considering his and Nieuwendyk's careers went head to head that still leaves Oates with a 112, 102 and 99 point season. Not to mention two other seasons where he led the NHL in assists. Nieuwendyk topped out at 95 and 92 points and I didn't remove his two best years.




Strongly disagree. There were only 4 times when Nieuwendyk outpointed Oates. Nieuwendyk's first two years he did it, also in 1998-'99 when Oates played only 59 games and lastly in 2003-'04 which was Oates final season. 4 times, that's it. Oates outscored him every other season head to head, and by some monstrous amounts too. So that above statement is incorrect.



Well.................

Oates - 1420 points in 1337 games
Nieuwendyk - 1126 points in 1257 games

Playoffs:
Oates - 156 points in 163 games
Nieuwendyk - 116 points in 158 games

Cup finals:
Oates - 6 points in 11 games
Nieuwendyk - 6 points in 12 games

The first two paragraphs are superb separation for Oates, it isn't even close and the less talked about the better for Nieuwendyk's case. But another interesting stat is this, for a supposed playoff legend who constantly gets credited with being on "three Cups with three different teams" he sure didn't produce very well. He didn't even play in the 2003 Cup final by the way. Oates reached the final both times when he was an old man, past his prime and he still competed with Nieuwendyk.

Not to mention, Oates was a far better passer than Nieuwendyk was a goal scorer. He was at least as good defensively and was similar at the faceoff circle. Who do you think had the better career? It takes me a heartbeat to answer that one.

If you take off Oates's top 2 seasons, his numbers look like this.
1192 games
1163 pts
80 pts per 82 game season

Nieuwendyk's numbers look like this.
1257 games
1126 pts
74 pts per 82 games

Not much of s difference. I know Oates still beats him and that's taking his top two seasons away so it may or may not be fair, but it does mean that for 90% of their careers they were pretty dang close offensively.

There's more to winning than just points too. As I said, everybody says Joe made their teams better. He was a leader. Oates was not. As much as I can guarantee without actually knowing 100%, I guarantee, minus Oate's top 2 seasons when his numbers were astronomical cause that may change things, that over half of the coaches and GMs in the league back in their day would take Joe over Adam. Joe did it all and was a leader, Adam did not and was not. Reasons why Joe was taken for international tourneys and Adam was not.

And again, Joe = Conn Smythe, and deserving. Can't take that away from him.

Hey obviously I prefer Joe and you prefer Adam and I doubt either one of us changes our mind. I don't think there's much of s difference at the end of the day. Different type of players. As I said, I think Oates should be in and I wouldnt have had a problem with Joe waiting this round and Adam being nominated instead.

 

[revolverjgw]

If you take off Oates's top 2 seasons, his numbers look like this.
1192 games
1163 pts
80 pts per 82 game season

Nieuwendyk's numbers look like this.
1257 games
1126 pts
74 pts per 82 games

Not much of s difference. I know Oates still beats him and that's taking his top two seasons away so it may or may not be fair, but it does mean that for 90% of their careers they were pretty dang close offensively.

Arbitrarily removing a player's offensive peak when comparing his offense to another player... uh, what is the point of that?

 

[unknown33]

Arbitrarily removing a player's offensive peak when comparing his offense to another player... uh, what is the point of that?

The point is that you can make Adam Oates' stats look like Steve Yzerman's when you remove his best two seasons.

 

[Big Phil]

If you take off Oates's top 2 seasons, his numbers look like this.
1192 games
1163 pts
80 pts per 82 game season

Nieuwendyk's numbers look like this.
1257 games
1126 pts
74 pts per 82 games

Not much of s difference. I know Oates still beats him and that's taking his top two seasons away so it may or may not be fair, but it does mean that for 90% of their careers they were pretty dang close offensively.

There's more to winning than just points too. As I said, everybody says Joe made their teams better. He was a leader. Oates was not. As much as I can guarantee without actually knowing 100%, I guarantee, minus Oate's top 2 seasons when his numbers were astronomical cause that may change things, that over half of the coaches and GMs in the league back in their day would take Joe over Adam. Joe did it all and was a leader, Adam did not and was not. Reasons why Joe was taken for international tourneys and Adam was not.

And again, Joe = Conn Smythe, and deserving. Can't take that away from him.

Hey obviously I prefer Joe and you prefer Adam and I doubt either one of us changes our mind. I don't think there's much of s difference at the end of the day. Different type of players. As I said, I think Oates should be in and I wouldnt have had a problem with Joe waiting this round and Adam being nominated instead.

Remember, his two best seasons he finished 4th in Hart voting and 3rd in scoring. This was without Neely. He also made Joe Juneau a 100 point man. The other year is probably 1990-'91 where he didn't win the Hart, but he set up the man who would later win it.

Look, Brett Hull was who he was, but his numbers took a noticeable dip after Oates was traded.

For the record, if you take Oates two best seasons away it is unfair from the get go, but he still outscores Nieuwy.

Joe's image has aged incredibly well for whatever reason. I can never put my finger on it, but maybe his role as a GM has something to do with it. We look at him and then say "Oh yeah, he won three Cups didn't he?" The constant exposure to him in the NHL landscape seems to make us remember him in a greater light. Oates isn't around the NHL at the immediate moment. He gets forgotten.

But the best way to answer this question is: who do you take as your #1 center, Oates or Nieuwy? Which player would put you in better shape?

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

Nieuwendyk wasn't really a top 10 player ever, but as I said if you take away Oates's best two seasons which kind of look more like anomalies than anything, they're very close.

Of course if you took Gilmour off the Flames, or Modano off the Stars, those are big blows and I doubt they're as successful. At the same time though, if you take off Nieuwendyk what do you have ? Both teams may have still won, hard to say but I can tell you that Nieuwendyk was huge for us in 1999. He was a huge piece and deserved the Conn Smythe. Though I would say that either Modano or Belfour could have won it too, but Nieuwendyk was easily good enough to win it and did. So that's pretty big for the ol resume.

I wasn't putting Nieuwendyk on those guys' level, I was just saying he was that type of player, just a bit below as in a #2. Everybody, whether it be a coach,GM,or teammate, says Nieuwendyk made them better. Of course by saying "everybody", I didnt speak with EVERYBODY, but I've heard it plenty from different sources.

Let's break it down like this:

Between Oates and Nieuwendyk, they're points are pretty similar season by season so consider that a wash.

-Oates has the couple stand out high scoring seasons that separates him and his career points total.
-Nieuwendyk has 3 Cups, played internationally and won Olympic gold, and also has a Conn Smythe that separates him.

As for Ciccarelli, he began his career the same season as Jari Kurri. Obviously Kurri had the higher single season numbers in the 80s, but at the end of their careers Dino had finished with more goals in less games. Not getting in to a who's better argument, just saying that one guy had a few high seasons that were anomalies and can be thanks to who he played with, while the other had a couple fairly high seaons but remained consistent for his entire career. He scored 35 goals as a 37 year old with the Lightning in his last final season ( 1996-97 )too so I dont know if we can necessarily chalk his totals up to simply having the benefit pf playing in the 1980s and early 90s.

As was stated above, excellence combined with longevity/endurance is worthy as well, not just having those couple standout seasons that could be considered anomalies. Having that one or two stand out seasons could be chalked up to luck, circumstances, or just good fortune and doesnt necessarily make you a better player. Tough to have luck or just good fortune every year over 15-20 seasons. Being consistently really good says something. Mike Gartner is a good example and I think people dumping on his induction is ridiculous.

well jari kurri was also one of the best defensive forwards of his era, and one of the best defensive wingers of all time. ciccarelli, on the other hand, was pretty one-dimensional. also, if you take out all of the years he played with gretzky, his '93 season with gretzky out most of the year is still a better and more game-changing player than ciccarelli ever was.

as for oates, take out his two big seasons and he is still one of the greatest pure set-up centers of all time. his top ten finishes would be: 1, 1, 2, 3, 3, 4, 4, 6, 7. he would be 20th all time in assists (and, obviously, if you didn't just take out those two years in oates' peak but adjusted them down to his "usual" prime production of 79 assists/season, he would be 8th all time, one assists higher than gordie howe; he would also add a 3rd and a 7th place finish to that list of top ten assists finishes.) i don't see how nieuwendyk can compare, with or without oates' two peak seasons.

if you take away nieuwendyk's best two playoff seasons, which kind of look like anomalies more than anything...

 

[SidGenoMario]

How do you make Adam Oates look a lot better than Joe Nieuwendyk? Make an argument about how Adam Oates without his 2 best seasons looks alot like Joe Nieuwendyk.

 

[jkrx]

Has oates ever played on a team like 98-2001 stars, its easier to question thier hearts when they dont play for contenders. I see sundin and modano as a clear step below the 1990-95 adam oates.

He was questioned by coaches and gms on his own team.

While we're at it, he could've played for contenders but he held out in Blues and was evetually traded to the Bruins where he played for a cup contending team. Then he were traded from Boston to Washington and Sindens motivation was that he didnt care for his team (starting to see a pattern?) where he played a cup final. Caps traded him because of money problems I believe. Flyers didn't resign him. He then played a second final with the ducks. Signed with the Oilers, was too old and retired after the season.

 

[pdd]

The other year is probably 1990-'91 where he didn't win the Hart, but he set up the man who would later win it.

Look, Brett Hull was who he was, but his numbers took a noticeable dip after Oates was traded.

Oates was the better player in 90-91; Hull never comes close to those numbers without Oates. Oates had 115 in 61. Hull had 131 in 78. Oates was on pace for over 150 points, which only five players have actually scored.

Despite his 86 goals, Hull shouldn't have been a Hart finalist. It should have been Yzerman, Gretzky, and Belfour.

 

[tjcurrie]

well jari kurri was also one of the best defensive forwards of his era, and one of the best defensive wingers of all time. ciccarelli, on the other hand, was pretty one-dimensional. also, if you take out all of the years he played with gretzky, his '93 season with gretzky out most of the year is still a better and more game-changing player than ciccarelli ever was.

as for oates, take out his two big seasons and he is still one of the greatest pure set-up centers of all time. his top ten finishes would be: 1, 1, 2, 3, 3, 4, 4, 6, 7. he would be 20th all time in assists (and, obviously, if you didn't just take out those two years in oates' peak but adjusted them down to his "usual" prime production of 79 assists/season, he would be 8th all time, one assists higher than gordie howe; he would also add a 3rd and a 7th place finish to that list of top ten assists finishes.) i don't see how nieuwendyk can compare, with or without oates' two peak seasons.

if you take away nieuwendyk's best two playoff seasons, which kind of look like anomalies more than anything...

I said I wasnt getting in to who was a better player out of Ciccarelli and Kurri, my point was that Ciccarelli didnt have the few anomaly seasons like lots of guys but still ended up with better numbers in the goals dept than Kurri did thank to his longevity and consistency. That deserves the credit that many here overlook. Also, ask the 1990 Devils how much of a game changer Ciccarelli was in the playoffs. The phrase "single-handedly" would probably come up. I'm also a Stars fan and Dino was dynamite for us back in the day. Most of the time. But like I said my point wasnt to get in to a Dino vs Jari.

Do you not see my point about Oates and Nieuwendyk ? That if you take away Oates's 2 anomaly seasons, their numbers are pretty close points wise so the big difference between the two is one guy has had the high scoring seasons to add to his resume while the other has 3 Cups, international success, and a Conn Smythe ? When you look at it that way, Oates looks to be more in the Pierre Turgeon category rather than the winner category. Of course there was times when Oates was an offensive machine, but that was a small window. For a good deal of their careers, Im taking Nieuwendyk and obviously so is the HOF.

How do you make Adam Oates look a lot better than Joe Nieuwendyk? Make an argument about how Adam Oates without his 2 best seasons looks alot like Joe Nieuwendyk.

I'm judging Bobby Carpenter more by every other season rather than his 50 goal season. Same as Todd Bertuzzi and his 97 point season. Dont miss my point here either. I'm not comparing Oates to those guys and I'm also not taking anything away from any of the three in those respective seasons. What I'm saying is that they compare rather closely points wise most of their careers. After that, we have one guy with a couple real high offensive seasons that separates him, and one guy with 3 Cups, international success, and a Conn Smythe that separates him.

Ron Francis is a good example. I judge him more by the 90% of his career where he was a little more than a ppg player. Not his couple big years in Pittsburgh. Though I give him credit for those and he was a heckuva player, I'm not running around calling him a 120 point player.

There was definitely 2 or 3 seasos where I myself would take Oates over Nieuwendyk. But after that it's pretty close and lots of those seasons I would take Nieuwendyk. So did Team Canada and I'm betting so would most coaches and GMs.

He was questioned by coaches and gms on his own team.

While we're at it, he could've played for contenders but he held out in Blues and was evetually traded to the Bruins where he played for a cup contending team. Then he were traded from Boston to Washington and Sindens motivation was that he didnt care for his team (starting to see a pattern?) where he played a cup final. Caps traded him because of money problems I believe. Flyers didn't resign him. He then played a second final with the ducks. Signed with the Oilers, was too old and retired after the season.

 

[tjcurrie]

Oates was the better player in 90-91; Hull never comes close to those numbers without Oates. Oates had 115 in 61. Hull had 131 in 78. Oates was on pace for over 150 points, which only five players have actually scored.

Despite his 86 goals, Hull shouldn't have been a Hart finalist. It should have been Yzerman, Gretzky, and Belfour.

For the record, Hull had a better ppg avg that Oates while the two were in St.Louis, before their tenures in St.Louis, and at the end of their careers.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

Do you not see my point about Oates and Nieuwendyk ? That if you take away Oates's 2 anomaly seasons, their numbers are pretty close points wise so the big difference between the two is one guy has had the high scoring seasons to add to his resume while the other has 3 Cups, international success, and a Conn Smythe ? When you look at it that way, Oates looks to be more in the Pierre Turgeon category rather than the winner category. Of course there was times when Oates was an offensive machine, but that was a small window. For a good deal of their careers, Im taking Nieuwendyk and obviously so is the HOF.



I'm judging Bobby Carpenter more by every other season rather than his 50 goal season. Same as Todd Bertuzzi and his 97 point season. Dont miss my point here either. I'm not comparing Oates to those guys and I'm also not taking anything away from any of the three in those respective seasons. What I'm saying is that they compare rather closely points wise most of their careers. After that, we have one guy with a couple real high offensive seasons that separates him, and one guy with 3 Cups, international success, and a Conn Smythe that separates him.

Ron Francis is a good example. I judge him more by the 90% of his career where he was a little more than a ppg player. Not his couple big years in Pittsburgh. Though I give him credit for those and he was a heckuva player, I'm not running around calling him a 120 point player.

There was definitely 2 or 3 seasos where I myself would take Oates over Nieuwendyk. But after that it's pretty close and lots of those seasons I would take Nieuwendyk. So did Team Canada and I'm betting so would most coaches and GMs.

yep, i saw your point. and it's wrong. look, i get that you're a fan first and i admire your passion for any and all former minnesota north stars/dallas stars, whether it's nieuwendyk, dino, hull, gartner, or whomever. but in my post above, i showed how even if you took out oates' two "anomaly" seasons, he still has five straight years of 79+ assists. how you can compare that to turgeon or nieuwendyk is beyond me.

your premise is that oates has two standout peak seasons that are balanced out by nieuwendyk's conn smythe, and support play on several playoff and international winners. even if we grant that (which i don't), oates still has a string of elite offensive seasons and nieuwendyk has... much less.

carpenter is not his one great season... fine. francis is not his blip with jagr... okay, i'll give you that. oates is not his two best seasons... well then didn't i already say:

if you take away nieuwendyk's best two playoff seasons, which kind of look like anomalies more than anything...

 

[molsonmuscle360]

He should be in the HHOF for sure. I was so excited to watch him in his last season when he played in Edmonton. I know he wasn't on top of his game or anything, but I brought my young cousin to show him exactly how you should play the game when you don't have the puck. Oates was a great playmaker, great at faceoffs, and was always in the right spot on the ice. I'm honestly amazed he hasn't transfered over to coaching.

 

[John Flyers Fan]

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...

Oates was better than Nieuwendyk, but Howe was a much better player.

 

[Big Phil]

Do you not see my point about Oates and Nieuwendyk ? That if you take away Oates's 2 anomaly seasons, their numbers are pretty close points wise so the big difference between the two is one guy has had the high scoring seasons to add to his resume while the other has 3 Cups, international success, and a Conn Smythe ? When you look at it that way, Oates looks to be more in the Pierre Turgeon category rather than the winner category. Of course there was times when Oates was an offensive machine, but that was a small window. For a good deal of their careers, Im taking Nieuwendyk and obviously so is the HOF.

You know you're on the losing end of an argument when you have to take away a player's two best seasons just to compare him to another player. Last time I checked, a player's entire body of work is judged, not just the seasons that he peaks. If that's the case let's take out Gilmour in 1993 and 1994. Lafontaine in 1993 and 1990. Fedorov in 1994 and 1996. Those guys have a more difficult case for getting into the HHOF without those years. But instead we have Gilmour in 1993 and 1994 with deep playoff runs and finishing 2nd in Hart voting, Fedorov winning the Hart and two Selkes and Lafontaine winning a scoring title if not for that stubborn Mario and beating cancer.

But for fun, let's take Oates' best two years out. Gone are 1991 and 1993.

That leaves 1990. He had 102 points and helped Hull crack 73 goals.
1992 - he scored 99 points. Bum.
1994 - 3rd in scoring in the NHL, 112 points, helps Neely to 50 in 49

Leads the NHL in assists two other seasons. Is probably the best forward on two different Cup finalist teams.

I'll admit take away his best two years, and he is probably Pierre Turgeon. But here's the kicker, take away Nieuwendyk's two best seasons and he's...............Ray Whitney maybe? Hmmm.

I prefer to judge a book by it's ENTIRE book

 

[canucks4ever]

You know you're on the losing end of an argument when you have to take away a player's two best seasons just to compare him to another player. Last time I checked, a player's entire body of work is judged, not just the seasons that he peaks. If that's the case let's take out Gilmour in 1993 and 1994. Lafontaine in 1993 and 1990. Fedorov in 1994 and 1996. Those guys have a more difficult case for getting into the HHOF without those years. But instead we have Gilmour in 1993 and 1994 with deep playoff runs and finishing 2nd in Hart voting, Fedorov winning the Hart and two Selkes and Lafontaine winning a scoring title if not for that stubborn Mario and beating cancer.

But for fun, let's take Oates' best two years out. Gone are 1991 and 1993.

That leaves 1990. He had 102 points and helped Hull crack 73 goals.
1992 - he scored 99 points. Bum.
1994 - 3rd in scoring in the NHL, 112 points, helps Neely to 50 in 49

Leads the NHL in assists two other seasons. Is probably the best forward on two different Cup finalist teams.

I'll admit take away his best two years, and he is probably Pierre Turgeon. But here's the kicker, take away Nieuwendyk's two best seasons and he's...............Ray Whitney maybe? Hmmm.

I prefer to judge a book by it's ENTIRE book

Exactly, the concept of taking away a player's two best years makes no sense. If we took out messier's two best seasons, he would look like a ron francis. Take away Yzerman's 155 point season and hes pretty much a teemu selanne/adam oates caliber of a player.