HHOF 2019

[streitz]

That would be a big NO, at least a dozen guys with over 1000 points are always going to need to buy a ticket to get into the HHOF.

Even a current guy Spezza, if he plays long enough to get to 1000 points (I don't think that he will) will never make it in.

Anything is possible

 

[GlitchMarner]

Agreed. Turgeon's not getting in for example.

I see Turgeon getting in eventually. Roenick, too.

Inducting Housley and Andreychuk opened the door for them if they weren't going to get in already.

 

[wetcoast]

I see Turgeon getting in eventually. Roenick, too.

Inducting Housley and Andreychuk opened the door for them if they weren't going to get in already.

Two wrongs won't make 2 rights.

I can see the better case for Roenick and someone has to be the highest scoring player not in the HHOF right?

 

[Sadekuuro]

i think patrik elias is the clear best modern LW not in the hall.

brian propp comes immediately to mind. you could make an argument for kevin stevens due to peak value. i could go either way on leclair vs markus naslund and i hate markus naslund. actually, mats naslund probably belongs in this conversation too if you count non-NHL accomplishments.

all to say, leclair is a high HOVG to me. a guy like brian bellows might be the low end of that range of LW.

as for zubov, i have him solidly in the neighbourhood of gary suter. a very very good player, but i have a whole tier of guys between zubov/suter(/gonchar/foote) and tremblay/wilson. guys like desjardins, derian hatcher go in that in between tier, among his contemporaries. farther back, probably carl brewer from what i know of him.

I usually agree with your evaluations of players from that era and would back you up all over this very thread, but I think you're selling Zubov short. He never played for a team I liked but I saw a ton of him and he was consistently excellent. I can see that his resume isn't eye-popping on paper, but from the looks of it the voting he received wasn't always commensurate with his contributions.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

This strikes me is a disingenuous representation of events. Admittedly, when he joined the Penguins he was mentally weak and homesick. But to say that he 'had Messier', I mean that was one of the most dysfunctional eras in the history of a team with a dysfunctional history. I know Naslund credits Messier for helping his career, and I don't doubt he did. But this isn't Messier from 89 or 94. This is Messier who is rotting a team from the inside.

fair enough. adding messier was a cheap shot, probably at both of them.

but the point was to avert the inevitable accusations (which were averted) that elias was lucky to come into such a great franchise, relative to the other LWs mentioned. elias won a spot on a very very good team and kept that spot for almost 20 years.

naslund didn't win a spot in the great situation he was drafted into. and yes i pick on naslund, but tbf he is not alone there. marty straka, a guy i liked a lot, also was expendable. sergei zubov didn't stick, shawn mceachern, glen murray, all quality players.

but a point in elias' favour that on a franchise where forwards were deemed expendable and the real pillars were brodeur and scott stevens, he was the one guy that lou lamoriello said, that's the constant that i'm building my offense around. all the other guys came and went, john maclean, bobby holik, young billy guerin and brian rolston, sykora, arnott, even madden, as devils a forward as there ever was, when he stopped being useful was chucked to the curb, only to immediately win a cup with chicago.

I also think that Naslund gets blamed a lot for the failings of his team. He was by far the best player on the Canucks. Yes, Bertuzzi had stretches over a year and a half stretch where he was unstoppable, but for all intents and purposes, the team was built around Naslund. A winger. Name me a team that was built around a winger that had any type of prolonged playoff success?

okay, so elias wasn't exactly the guy the team was built around, but the devils forward corps was certainly built around his versatility and him being the top guy for a long long time.

other than that, off the top of my head, guy lafleur, gordie howe, yeah it's a high bar.

but consider this: peak naslund lost in the playoffs to 2002 detroit, which we can't possibly hold against him, then to two teams built around wingers: minnesota (gaborik) and calgary (iginla). we're not exactly asking naslund to win four cups in a row; we'd just like him to get out of the first round more than once and maybe score a couple of times in elimination games against the wild.

I think Naslund is too much of a class act to say otherwise about Messier (not that I have any proof that he might think that way).

well actually, now that you mention it,

"I was never going make the kind of impact Mess does because I was never going to be the physical force he is,'' Naslund said shortly after becoming captain. ''In his last year here, a lot of players were scared to say anything in the locker room with Mark in the room. To me, the best way to improve a team's chemistry is through give and take.

''And while I was in awe watching Mario, I was young," he said. "What I learned most from him is that Mario has something that not a lot of people have. He doesn't think he ever is going to fail. When you always have that approach, that you're going to make it, that you are going to make a difference, the mind is a pretty powerful thing.''

you can read between the lines for yourself.

NHL.com In Depth: Markus Naslund

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

I usually agree with your evaluations of players from that era and would back you up all over this very thread, but I think you're selling Zubov short. He never played for a team I liked but I saw a ton of him and he was consistently excellent. I can see that his resume isn't eye-popping on paper, but from the looks of it the voting he received wasn't always commensurate with his contributions.

what if we said zubov was like larry murphy without the freakishly long career? would that be fair?

 

[MarkusNaslund19]

I think Naslund is too much of a class act to say otherwise about Messier (not that I have any proof that he might think that way).

That said I doubt that Naslund makes it in, he is missing something extra that most HHOF voters seem to be looking for.

The case for is being 4th in NHL scoring during his 8 year prime, 3rd in goals

Player Season Finder | Hockey-Reference.com

The case against is his poor playoffs, scoring being down a lot in that era and that scoring has gone up in this current era, which is something that I'm not sure voters are going to factor in given the Dave Andreychuk addition.

If he had a slightly higher peak or better playoff year that would help him a ton.

Totally agree.

I think Naslund is a polarizing player. People denigrate him but he was a truly fantastic player. People aren't wrong that there were moments that you wish he had come through and he was unable to. But he was still an absolute superstar. The penance he pays for those moments (and the failings of his teammates, including Cloutier in a major way), is that he isn't a hall of famer.

 

[HawkNut]

I would say yes to both Turgeon and Roenick. Besides, if it's the Hall of Fane, emphasis on fame, Roenick has that.

 

[MarkusNaslund19]

fair enough. adding messier was a cheap shot, probably at both of them.

but the point was to avert the inevitable accusations (which were averted) that elias was lucky to come into such a great franchise, relative to the other LWs mentioned. elias won a spot on a very very good team and kept that spot for almost 20 years.

naslund didn't win a spot in the great situation he was drafted into. and yes i pick on naslund, but tbf he is not alone there. marty straka, a guy i liked a lot, also was expendable. sergei zubov didn't stick, shawn mceachern, glen murray, all quality players.

but a point in elias' favour that on a franchise where forwards were deemed expendable and the real pillars were brodeur and scott stevens, he was the one guy that lou lamoriello said, that's the constant that i'm building my offense around. all the other guys came and went, john maclean, bobby holik, young billy guerin and brian rolston, sykora, arnott, even madden, as devils a forward as there ever was, when he stopped being useful was chucked to the curb, only to immediately win a cup with chicago.




okay, so elias wasn't exactly the guy the team was built around, but the devils forward corps was certainly built around his versatility and him being the top guy for a long long time.

other than that, off the top of my head, guy lafleur, gordie howe, yeah it's a high bar.

but consider this: peak naslund lost in the playoffs to 2002 detroit, which we can't possibly hold against him, then to two teams built around wingers: minnesota (gaborik) and calgary (iginla). we're not exactly asking naslund to win four cups in a row; we'd just like him to get out of the first round more than once and maybe score a couple of times in elimination games against the wild.




well actually, now that you mention it,

"I was never going make the kind of impact Mess does because I was never going to be the physical force he is,'' Naslund said shortly after becoming captain. ''In his last year here, a lot of players were scared to say anything in the locker room with Mark in the room. To me, the best way to improve a team's chemistry is through give and take.

''And while I was in awe watching Mario, I was young," he said. "What I learned most from him is that Mario has something that not a lot of people have. He doesn't think he ever is going to fail. When you always have that approach, that you're going to make it, that you are going to make a difference, the mind is a pretty powerful thing.''

you can read between the lines for yourself.

NHL.com In Depth: Markus Naslund

I can see we disagree on some things here, but it's an enjoyable debate. I'd expect nothing less, you're a good poster.

To the first point, Elias was a fabulous player and I always liked him. But I don't think he was in Naslund's league if we're honest. I can see where history will always make this a debate. But Elias did what he did, if we're talking team accomplishments, with some mixture of Stevens, Niedermayer, Rafalski, and Brodeur.

Then he has with him Sykora and Arnott for a large portion, which isn't a massive downgrade from Bertuzzi Morrison, particularly in the playoffs. He has guys like Holik, Mogilny, Nieuwendyk, Langenbrunner. As well as 3 hall of famers (Brodeur, Nieds, Stevens).

I won't denigrate him and say he wasn't their most important forward, he was. But forward wasn't their best position. It's like, if you added prime Ziggy Palffy to the Nashville Predators today, his career is going to be much more remembered and he may well win 2 or 3 cups.

And I take real issue with the years you named where he should have made it further than he did in the playoffs.

2002 The team is on the verge of a mind-bending upset - goaltending flops.
2003 Canucks beat a good Blues team (after a scare, and they were flu-ridden, but still...), and then has a Minnesota team on the ropes. Only to be let down by goaltending again (not the only problem, but christ was Cloutier bad in those last three games).

2004 Missing Bertuzzi, Cloutier goes down, and Auld is our starter for some inexplicable reason (Crawford never liked Hedberg).

Let's not forget Naslund's Opus was the rush that led to Cooke tying game 7 with 6 seconds left. If we win that game, Naslund's whole narrative changes.

 

[Sadekuuro]

what if we said zubov was like larry murphy without the freakishly long career? would that be fair?

I wouldn't have thought of that, but it's not bad. Two of the best I've ever seen at working the offensive blue line. But I never got to see 80s Murph (I did see lots of him as an old man, and Zubov was definitely more dynamic at the time, but that's not a fair comparison) and my memory of him in Pittsburgh is hazy, so it's hard to say for sure. He used to shrug off his declining speed as his career wound down, saying he was never fast to begin with, and while he was remarkably effective for someone so slow, surely he must have skated better than that at some point...

 

[Giotrapani91]

Would Gary suter be a bad pick for induction, and would Gary roberts be a bad inductee.

 

[frisco]

Would Gary suter be a bad pick for induction, and would Gary roberts be a bad inductee.

There are worse guys in. At the same time there's probably 30-35 guys more deserving than those two that I'd say would be ahead of them in line. Not a slam on them and with the right mix of guys on the selection committee it wouldn't shock me or anything to see them get in.

My Best-Carey

 

[The Panther]

Would Gary suter be a bad pick for induction

Yes. Terrible.

and would Gary roberts be a bad inductee.

Roberts has the played-for-two-Canadian-franchises thing going for him, and he has the cronies, and he was kind of awesome. But he wasn't good enough to be talking about the Hall of Fame.


The purpose of a sports Hall of Fame is not to induct every above average player.

 

[The Wizard of Oz]

Anyone else find it slightly cringe inducing those late 80’s - early 90s Sabre’s teams are going to potentially end up with 4-5 HoFers while accomplishing very little of note? Like dang all these guys in their primes you’d think Buffalo had a mini dynasty somewhere. Shouldn’t that be a clue to the voters something isn’t adding up?

 

[The Wizard of Oz]

Ryan Miller...? Will even make the US HHOF?

Makes it on the 2010 olympics. Honestly the guy deserved better award consideration but as for the Hockey Hall of Fame nah. He’s behind Richter and Beezer by quite a bit.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Anyone else find it slightly cringe inducing those late 80’s - early 90s Sabre’s teams are going to potentially end up with 4-5 HoFers while accomplishing very little of note? Like dang all these guys in their primes you’d think Buffalo had a mini dynasty somewhere. Shouldn’t that be a clue to the voters something isn’t adding up?

You aren't the first one around here to mention this...

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

Anyone else find it slightly cringe inducing those late 80’s - early 90s Sabre’s teams are going to potentially end up with 4-5 HoFers while accomplishing very little of note? Like dang all these guys in their primes you’d think Buffalo had a mini dynasty somewhere. Shouldn’t that be a clue to the voters something isn’t adding up?

by my count, unless you count hasek, which imo you shouldn't, it's 3-4 HHOFers

turgeon/lafontaine (can't count them as two players)
housley/hawerchuk (ditto)
fuhr/andreychuk (ditto)
mogilny

but as i mentioned upthread, buffalo did have a weird series of hall of famer-for-hall of famer trades (assuming turgeon is just a matter of time)

does gerry meehan hold the record for most consecutive seasons with a hall of famer for hall of famer trades? (assuming that we count draft day as the last day of a season, rather than the first; and that turgeon gets the nod at some point)

Buffalo Sabres acquire	Date	Winnipeg Jets acquire
Dale Hawerchuk 1990 1st round pick (#14-Brad May) [TBODY] [/TBODY]	June 16, 1990	Scott Arniel Phil Housley Jeff Parker 1990 1st round pick (#19-Keith Tkachuk) [TBODY] [/TBODY]

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Buffalo Sabres acquire	Date	New York Islanders acquire
Randy Hillier Pat LaFontaine Randy Wood 1992 4th round pick (#80-Dean Melanson) [TBODY] [/TBODY]	October 25, 1991	Benoit Hogue Uwe Krupp Dave McLlwain Pierre Turgeon [TBODY] [/TBODY]

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Toronto Maple Leafs acquire	Date	Buffalo Sabres acquire
Dave Andreychuk Daren Puppa 1993 1st round pick (#12-Kenny Jonsson) [TBODY] [/TBODY]	February 2, 1993	Grant Fuhr 1995 5th round pick (#119-Kevin Popp) [TBODY] [/TBODY]

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

edit: i can only think of two GMs who have even done it in back-to-back years--

keenan (housley/macinnis, then shanahan/pronger)

and punch imlach (duff/bathgate, then bathgate/pronovost)

 

[trentmccleary]

by my count, unless you count hasek, which imo you shouldn't, it's 3-4 HHOFers

turgeon/lafontaine (can't count them as two players)
housley/hawerchuk (ditto)
fuhr/andreychuk (ditto)
mogilny

Barrasso is still on the doorstep too, as probably the goalie with probably the best resume among eligibles outside the HHOF.

 

[WingsFan95]

I think Alfredsson and Doug Wilson should be the headliners personally. I've touted Wilson for years and never truly understood why he got passed up if for nothing but he's a quiet type of guy it seems and he's been managing in San Jose which should be a boost but isn't because it's San Jose.

Outside of those 2 I DO think Mogilny and Joseph make the most sense. They've waited a while and both were clearly top talent for several years although I think Joseph was considerably more valuable. Then I think Elias or Roenick, Jeremy for the stats and Elias for being a core of 2 Devils championships and really that team lacks Hall of Fame representation (I don't think 3 guys is enough).

I think Turgeon will continue to wait.

OH and I'd definitely put Tom Barrasso in but seeing as how he's not in or been seriously considered makes me think he's never getting in. He won a Vezina and was runner-up 3 additional times (plus 3rd place finish) has 2 Cups and the career bulk stats. Soooo, yeah he should have been in already.

 

[Giotrapani91]

What abut osgood will he make it in eventually.

 

[Hobnobs]

What abut osgood will he make it in eventually.

Most likely not. The only reason I could see him getting in is that he's well liked.

 

[Hobnobs]

Anyone else find it slightly cringe inducing those late 80’s - early 90s Sabre’s teams are going to potentially end up with 4-5 HoFers while accomplishing very little of note? Like dang all these guys in their primes you’d think Buffalo had a mini dynasty somewhere. Shouldn’t that be a clue to the voters something isn’t adding up?

Which exact players are we talking about here? Im guessing Mogilny and Turgeon are the potential inductees?

 

[blueandgoldguy]

Man, looking at the numbers I think Clark Gillies making it into the Hall opened the doors for a lot of other players. He has that brief peak going for him and being part of a dynasty, but his peak was incredibly short and his career stats just look so underwhelming. Same with his playoff stats. To be honest, if I had a gun to my head and was told to pick one of Andreychuk and Gillies, I think I would pick Andreychuk.

Corey Perry who had a somewhat short peak, and is probably done as a first line player, would probably be my pick for the HOF over someone like Gillies too.

 

[Hobnobs]

Man, looking at the numbers I think Clark Gillies making it into the Hall opened the doors for a lot of other players. He has that brief peak going for him and being part of a dynasty, but his peak was incredibly short and his career stats just look so underwhelming. Same with his playoff stats. To be honest, if I had a gun to my head and was told to pick one of Andreychuk and Gillies, I think I would pick Andreychuk.

Corey Perry who had a somewhat short peak, and is probably done as a first line player, would probably be my pick for the HOF over someone like Gillies too.

I just see guys like Andreychuk, Gillies, Dino as the glue guy section. Now they just need to catch up on defensive specialists, both forwards and defensemen.

 

[Giotrapani91]

Ik this is kinda sad how this players career ended but does vladdy Konstantinov belong in the hall, not just for his NHL accomplishments but his accomplishments in the soviet leagues.

 

[Giotrapani91]

I just see guys like Andreychuk, Gillies, Dino as the glue guy section. Now they just need to catch up on defensive specialists, both forwards and defensemen.

With defenseman that were defensive defenseman you look at guys like suter, numminen, and Kevin Lowe those guys were great defensive defensemen.