Discussion in 'The History of Hockey' started by Arselona, Jun 28, 2018.
I think eventually he goes in.
Elias had 2 seasons that were easily better than anything Middleton did. It's like some posters still don't realize that overall league scoring dropped like a rock during the 1990s and stayed down.
Elias actually has more career points (unadjusted!) too.
While I agree with you that some posters don't realize that scoring went down, it's the same problem with the HHOF voting committee.
I doubt that they really analyze their selections all that deeply.
Eventually, they will realize they have relatively few 90s-00s players in amd relax counting standards. I agree that it probably won't happen immediately.
Unlike 99% of this board, I'm perfectly ok with HOF milestones. However, I don't necessarily look at it from a perspective of totals, but more a perspective of all time placement for the player's respective position.
This is where I set the standard for automatic induction in ANY era.
FORWARDS (top 20 all time)
Goals: 578 or more
Points: 1,392 or more
DEFENSEMEN (top 10 all time)
Points: 949 or more
GOALIES (top 10 all time)
Games: 869 or more
Wins: 424 or more
Shutouts: 77 or more
IMO those thresholds are HOF worthy in any era, where NO CONTEXT IS NEEDED. Meaning, any player that reaches any of the above milestone for their respective position at the time of retirement, that player is automatically a HOF'er.
Why am I ok with this? I believe the HOF is more than just about single season top 10 finishes and trophies. I think they're TOO relied upon when trying to pick HOF'ers. It's possible to have a HOF career without ever being an elite player.
I get your point but 424 wins in the current NHL setup isn't and shouldn't be any kind of benchmark for automatic induction IMO.
Luongo has 476 and he isn't automatic, although I do think voters will vote him in.
Luongo is getting in. I have no doubt. Really the only indictment on him is the fact Cujo isn't in. I will say this though. Goalies are a lot more tricky for this line of thinking. Quite frankly so are defensemen, but at least they still have the ability to show offensive production.
Cujo belongs in imo he's what 6th all time in wins
I agree and hope he does.
I agree, and I think Luongo is going to fall into that awkward space as well.
I think there is some doubt. I'd rate Luongo's odds as 55-45, which means he has a fair chance, but if he'd won that game 7 (or just one more game that Finals), he'd be at maybe 80-20.
Are you really not considering Elias’ 40 goal season just because he didn’t score 41 goals?
He's one of only 3 goalies to reach 1,000 games and he'll probably finish his career with over 500 wins. He's quite easily getting in.
He also had 352 regular season losses
You have to be a pretty good goaltender to be afforded the opportunity to lose 352 games.
Joseph's in if it were my decision. So is Luongo.
Joseph, Luongo, Elias and Middleton are all Hall of Famers in my mind. Don't know if they're 1st ballot Hall of Famers though.
It is hard to say with him. It all depends on how people view him when his career is over. In my mind he falls into a category where he is among the best goalies of the last two decades. Since the lockout you probably pick Lundqvist as the best, but would Luongo be 2nd? If that is the case, he could be in even if it is a weak era for top end goalies. He sort of has the opposite problem of M-A Fleury. Fleury has the Cups but probably needs the better Vezina voting to get in. Luongo desperately needed a Cup. Although the 2010 Olympics will go a long ways.
I didn't know games played was a Hall of Fame qualification. I mean, is Luke Richardson getting in because he played 1417 NHL games?
I can see the case for Luongo either way. I certainly don't see any justification for arguing that he's a slam-dunk. He has led the NHL in wins once, and in losses twice. He has never led in save-percentage or GAA, and has a middling playoff record.
The main case for him would be his two 2nd-team All Stars and his Gold medal. Three times he's been top-3 in Vezina voting (and five times in the top-4), which is impressive, but hardly earth-shattering when looking at 17+ seasons as a starter.
Since goalies are the ultimate position for success as a reflection of overall team strength, we have to accept that few goalies will have consistently outstanding statistics over many seasons in a row. That's just very rare. Even the best goalies tend to have brief statistical peaks that wax and wane, with large dips in their careers.
Some people (not me) think Patrick Roy is the best goalie ever. Yet even Roy failed to be a 1st or 2nd-team All Star for nine seasons in a row in his middle/late-prime.
The problem since the Lockout -- and even more so now that the pendulum is starting to swing back towards offence -- is that it has become very difficult for any NHL starting goaltender to clearly separate himself from the pack. It's very much akin to how Orr, Lafleur, Bourque, Gretzky, Lemieux, etc. were clearly head-and-shoulders above average skaters of their era, but then during the 1998 to 2004 and 2008 to 2014 eras, it was very difficult for any skaters to appear clearly above other elite players. Goaltending since the Lockout, and especially now, is in that situation.
"Playing ability, sportsmanship, character and contributions to his or her team or teams and to the game of hockey in general"
I do see Luongo ticking off enough of those boxes.
GP is absolutely a HOF qualifier. You don't get to play that many games unless you're elite. There's only 3 goalies to play 1,000 games and Luongo is one of them.
BTW, Luke Richardson wasn't a goalie.
His overall career longevity puts him in. He's simply played in too many games and has too many wins to leave him out.
Single season top 10 finishes and trophies are NOT the only things that matter.
Any chance we'll see Frank Joseph Zamboni jr make it?
I agree with what you are saying here and I think HHOF voters probably line up this way but in no way should 1 single game decide that much IMO.
Luongo will have 0 trouble getting in.
When did first ballot become some kind of additional award for HoFers?
I find it odd.
If they deserve to be in, they deserve to be in.
I don’t understand the perspective that they deserve to “eventually get in” once they’ve paid their dues waiting to get in.
Separate names with a comma.