Damn. I had made a hockey version of "the Keltner List" in a discussion about Mike Gartner, I called it "the Gartner Test." But I can't find a trace of it, I guess it was lost in the great board implosion. Anyways, I re-did it very quickly (not that it takes long, but I recall adding a few things (I think there were 17 questions) and changing some other stuff, but I can't remember what exactly those changes were), and I'll present it without explaination (except for one question, when we get to it). If someone can actually find it, I'd be extremely grateful.
*There are no correct or incorrect answers to these questions. There is no ideal combination of answers. It is simply a set of questions that helps one put a player in a better perspective.*
The Gartner Test: Claude Lemieux
1. Was he ever regarded as the best player in hockey? Did anybody, while he was active, ever suggest that he was the best player in hockey?
Not during the regular season. I can not specifially recall anyone saying it, but I'm sure that at times he was called the best player in the postseason in a given year besides 1995. But that's not the same as the best player in hockey.
2. Was he the best player on his team?
No.
His first four full seasons were with Montreal from 1986-87 to 89-90. Patrick Roy was clearly the best player on those teams, Mats Naslund was clearly the best skater the first three years, his fourth year he was not healthy enough to be the best skater.
His next five seasons were in New Jersey, from 1990-91 to 94-95. He was never the best player there either. 90-91 he was not better than John MacLean or Brendan Shanahan. He led the team in scoring in 91-92 and 92-93, but Scott Stevens was the best player on the team those years. In his final two seasons in his first stint in NJ, Scott Stevens continued to be the best skater, while Martin Brodeur became the goalie.
He then played in Colorado for the next 4+ years, behind Joe Sakic, Peter Forsberg, and once again, Patrick Roy. In his fifth season he was dealt to NJ, where he was not the best player, then off to Phoenix for two and a half seasons and Dallas for half a season, again not the best player on his team.
3. Was he the best player in hockey at his position? Was he the best player in his conference at his position?
No and no. The one time you could make a case was probably 92-93, when he was the leading scorer for the Devils, but even then he wasn't a top 5 right wing.
4. Did he have an impact on a number of Cup runs?
Absolutely. Lemieux won 4 Cups: 1 with Montreal (he also made the Finals with Montreal in a losing effort), 2 with NJ, and 1 with Colorado. He was second on the team in playoff scoring with Montreal, and scored well in the other three Cups. He also scored well in three conference finals appearances. He scored a number of clutch goals in those runs. And as always he was an enormous physical presence.
5. Was he good enough that he could play regularly after passing his prime?
He scored 87 points in 196 games after turning 36, only once playing more than 46 games (although he did play all 82 games that season). That's a .44 point per game rate, compared to a .70 ppg rate prior to that, a ~33% drop off. Perhaps that is not a relatively large drop off, but that info is not readily available. Lemieux was never a great scorer but he was a good scorer, albeit inconsistent. So, from age 36 onwards, he scored at two thirds the rate had in the past, and only played three seasons.
6. Is he the very best hockey player in history who is not in the Hall of Fame?
Glenn Anderson, Mark Howe and Brad Park immediately come to mind. There are certainly others who were better players.
7. Are most players who have comparable statistics in the Hall of Fame?
Lemieux's point total pales in comparison to his peers. 785 points in 1197 games in a career that started in the mid-80s is certainly nothing to scoff at, but they are far from dominate numbers for his era.
8. Do the player's numbers meet Hall of Fame standards?
Note: Hall of Fame Standards is a formula for the baseball hall of fame. Since we've already discussed his career numbers, this question will be passed.
9. Is there any evidence to suggest that the player was significantly better or worse than is suggested by his statistics?
Yes. Lemieux was a punishing hitter and scored a number of clutch goals in the playoffs. He seemingly always turned his game up a notch further than everyone else when the playoffs arrived, and he was as tough a customer as there was when he played. He was also an excellent defensive forward. Lemieux was the quintessential on the ice leader, if a big hit or big goal was needed, he probably made it or created it.
10. Is he the best player at his position who is eligible for the Hall of Fame?
There are a number of right wings who have a better claim. For example Dino Cicarelli is 40th all time in scoring, and scored at a much better rate than Lemieux did. Expand to wings in general and Glenn Anderson is all but a lock, but will not get in for personal reasons.
11. How many MVP-type seasons did he have? Did he ever win an MVP award? If not, how many times was he close? How many awards total did he ever win?
He was never an MVP-type player. His only award was the Conn Smythe in 94-95, and it was deserved.
12. How many All-Star-type seasons did he have? How many All-Star games did he play in? Did most of the players who played in this many All-Star games go into the Hall of Fame?
Lemieux played in the '87 Rendez-Vous game that replaced the All Star Game and the 1996 World Cup, those were his only All Star Games/All Star Team appearances.
13. If this man were the best player on his team, would it be likely that the team could make the Finals?
Probably not. Lemieux was always a greatbut inconsistent playoff scorer, his best scoring run in the playoffs in 1997 couldn't get his team to the Finals.
14. What impact did the player have on hockey history? Was he responsible for any rule changes? Did he introduce any new equipment? Did he change the game in any way?
His hit on Kris Draper ignited the fiercest rivalry in hockey in the late 90s.
15. Did the player uphold the standards of sportsmanship and character that the Hall of Fame, in its written guidelines, instructs us to consider?
Sportsmanship was never Claude Lemieux's strong point. There have been players that were far more unsportsmanly in the HOF, but they were also far better players.
*******************
Comments, corrections and constructive critism are always welcomed.
)
