Hockey Hall Of Fame 2015 Inductees (who should be in)

[Ishdul]

Recchi is one those weird guys, like Turgeon or today Giroux, that teams never did or would consider building around.

Even in his top offensive seasons was he ever really seriously considered as a top 10 forward in the world?

I really don't agree with that sentiment for Giroux at least, and I think it's a big stretch for Recchi and Turgeon as well.

And definitely yes to top 10 forwards, and that's even considering that he was definitely taken for granted in his best years.

I know they played different positions, but if Housley gets in, Osgood should get in. Much like Housley, he accumulated impressive numbers (as far as wins go). Also, he's had team successes that Housley never had.

Two wrongs don't make a right.

I would also have Housley in way before Osgood and I'm far from a Housley fan.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I don't see any argument that either Gartner or Housley has a better HOF case than Recchi. I'd take Recchi on basically every possible category:

-better player
-more accomplished player
-better peak
-better prime
-better career

Gartner was the best defensively between Recchi, Housley, and himself, though that's not saying all that much. (And I do agree that Recchi is easily above both as an overall player).

 

[Big Phil]

You could say quite confidently that about half of the HHOF guys, or perhaps more, we're seldom referred to as sure fire future HHOF guys.

Let's face the reality of the HHOF, most guys are in their as compilers (of things like stats, awards and yes being on SC teams) and aren't what one would normally refer to as sure fire HHOF guys.

Even at the end of his career though. Did anyone think Housley was a HHOFer? Were we witnessing one at that point? If this is 2000, do you think that once Housley's career is over that he is destined for the HHOF?

Here's another thing with Housley. We have been privy to witnessing Doughty, Keith, Chara, etc. in recent years in the playoffs. Even Gonchar to an extent. These guys quarterbacked their teams to victory. They were solid and were an integral part of winning, sometimes THE integral part. We just never have seen Housley come close to that level. A team winning the Cup didn't have him on their team, never mind a team wanting a deep playoff run. Look no further than a young Gonchar being the much better defenseman in 1998 when the Caps went deep. 10, 11 years later Gonchar is much older and is a leader on back to back finalists, winning once. You might say, well, Housley never had the opportunity to do this. Yes he did, in 1998. He had a goalie playing out of his mind that spring as well as a forward corps that wasn't elite, but fairly good with Oates, Bondra, a surprising Juneau, Bellows, and a playoff warrior in Tikannen.

Where was the 33 year old Housley then? He was an afterthought. One of the most offensive defensemen of all-time had 4 assists in 18 games. That's it. Not good enough, especially during the Cup final that was a sweep with some close games. You can't tell me 33 years old is "old" for a defenseman.

So that, among other things, is the problem with Housley. You couldn't count on him when it mattered.

Here's an open question for anyone -- has there ever been a D-man in the Hall of Fame who was weaker defensively than Housley?

I don't know if there is. To be honest, Housley might just be the d-man with the worst playoff resume as well.

That's a double whammy right there.

Okay, most people will agree that Makarov and Lindros are clearly more HHOF worthy than Housley but Recchi?

Recchi has alot of Turgeon/Gartner on his resume and while I think he will get in he is hardly a lock.

Oh man, Recchi was certainly above Turgeon and Gartner. When is there a season someone takes Turgeon over Recchi? 1993 maybe? Even then, we're talking about 9 points that separated these two that year.

Recchi has the same thing going for him that Joe Nieuwendyk did that the voters love. He was on three different Cup winning teams. He did good on all three of them especially Pittsburgh in 1991. He's also had the better career over Nieuwendyk. Honestly, I am not sure what the issue is. This is the 2nd year in a row he's been snubbed. You could understand 2014 since it was such a deep crop, but his name should have been one that you immediately pick right after that.

 

[Big Phil]

Here's another issue. His Norris trophy finishes:

3, 5, 5, 5, 9, 10, 14

Compared to Steve Duchesne:
5, 5, 7, 15

Or Eric Desjardins:
4, 5, 9, 9, 10, 14

Or Sergei Gonchar:
4, 4, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 14, 18

Or Sergei Zubov:
3, 4, 8, 8, 9, 9, 9, 12, 13, 13, 17, 17

Or Doug Wilson:
1, 3, 4, 4, 12

All of these are guys I don't think I would have inducted. They were very close, but no cigar. Some have a good case though. Wilson, Zubov and Gonchar do. In fact, I had them ahead of Housley. Housley's Norris finishes aren't as good as Zubov and Gonchar and you could argue Wilson's. All three were better in the postseason, in the case of Zubov I would say exceptionally better. Desjardins and Duchesne were better in the playoffs.

You can't say Housley didn't open the door here.

 

[Hardyvan123]

Here's another issue. His Norris trophy finishes:

3, 5, 5, 5, 9, 10, 14

Compared to Steve Duchesne:
5, 5, 7, 15

Or Eric Desjardins:
4, 5, 9, 9, 10, 14

Or Sergei Gonchar:
4, 4, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 14, 18

Or Sergei Zubov:
3, 4, 8, 8, 9, 9, 9, 12, 13, 13, 17, 17

Or Doug Wilson:
1, 3, 4, 4, 12

All of these are guys I don't think I would have inducted. They were very close, but no cigar. Some have a good case though. Wilson, Zubov and Gonchar do. In fact, I had them ahead of Housley. Housley's Norris finishes aren't as good as Zubov and Gonchar and you could argue Wilson's. All three were better in the postseason, in the case of Zubov I would say exceptionally better. Desjardins and Duchesne were better in the playoffs.

You can't say Housley didn't open the door here.

We will agree to disagree here as Zubov (who had a better career than Housely IMO) should be in the HHOF as well as Gonchar.

All 3 of these guys are better than Harry Howell who is also in the HHOF and is the answer to a worse playoff resume than Housley.

I'm pretty sure it was mentioned up thread but Housley was injured in that 18 game playoff run and that does affect his numbers.

Even then it's a better playoff resume than Harry Howell.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/players/h/howelha01.html

http://www.hockey-reference.com/players/h/houslph01.html

 

[Rob Scuderi]

We will agree to disagree here as Zubov (who had a better career than Housely IMO) should be in the HHOF as well as Gonchar.

All 3 of these guys are better than Harry Howell who is also in the HHOF and is the answer to a worse playoff resume than Housley.

I'm pretty sure it was mentioned up thread but Housley was injured in that 18 game playoff run and that does affect his numbers.

Even then it's a better playoff resume than Harry Howell.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/players/h/howelha01.html

http://www.hockey-reference.com/players/h/houslph01.html

I don't get it, Howell was never prized for his offense unlike the other three.

 

[Hardyvan123]

I don't get it, Howell was never prized for his offense unlike the other three.

In post 328 he asks if there ever was a HHOF Ddman with a worse playoff resume than Housley and indeed there are at least 2 in Howell and Flanman IMO.

It's kind of a moot point anyways as Housley was inducted due to his playoff resume he is in due to his elite regular season scoring and longevity in doing so.

 

[Rob Scuderi]

In post 328 he asks if there ever was a HHOF Ddman with a worse playoff resume than Housley and indeed there are at least 2 in Howell and Flanman IMO.

It's kind of a moot point anyways as Housley was inducted due to his playoff resume he is in due to his elite regular season scoring and longevity in doing so.

What are you considering when reaching that conclusion about Howell and Flaman's playoff records?

Howell was a defensive-minded guy on relatively weak teams. Have you read anything about him struggling in the postseason? Linking his hockey-reference page next to an offensive-minded guy doesn't really make sense to me.

Flaman was a defensive-minded guy on some very good teams. He won a Stanley Cup at the tail end of Toronto's dynasty and then made the finals two years in a row in Boston while making the 2nd All-Star Team each year. Again hockey-reference career stats aren't of much help here and while I haven't flipped through newspaper clippings of those playoffs, but I'd be surprised if he was a weak link on those teams.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Here's an open question for anyone -- has there ever been a D-man in the Hall of Fame who was weaker defensively than Housley?

"Ever" is a long time. Hard to say how good or not good early amateur HHOFers like Hobey Baker and Phat Wilson were. Among NHL HHOFers, Housley is pretty clearly the worst defensive dman in the HHOF, and I don't think it's particularly close either.

Here's another issue. His Norris trophy finishes:

3, 5, 5, 5, 9, 10, 14

Compared to Steve Duchesne:
5, 5, 7, 15

Or Eric Desjardins:
4, 5, 9, 9, 10, 14

Or Sergei Gonchar:
4, 4, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 14, 18

Or Sergei Zubov:
3, 4, 8, 8, 9, 9, 9, 12, 13, 13, 17, 17

Or Doug Wilson:
1, 3, 4, 4, 12

All of these are guys I don't think I would have inducted. They were very close, but no cigar. Some have a good case though. Wilson, Zubov and Gonchar do. In fact, I had them ahead of Housley. Housley's Norris finishes aren't as good as Zubov and Gonchar and you could argue Wilson's. All three were better in the postseason, in the case of Zubov I would say exceptionally better. Desjardins and Duchesne were better in the playoffs.

You can't say Housley didn't open the door here.

Also, keep in mind that there are a number of writers who treat Norris voting as basically an Art Ross race for defensemen, so offensive guys who stink in their own end are always going to receive a handful of votes that more rounded or defensive guys of similar quality will not. So Housley and Gonchar are actually going to be overrated by Norris voting (like early career Zubov was overrated and later career Zubov probably underrated).

Eric Desjardins is exactly the type of guy underrated by voters, quiet, well-rounded, Lidstromesque efficient defenseman, but not nearly as good as Lidstrom.

The point being that Norris trophy voting is going to be highly favorable towards someone like Housley, compared to other types of defensemen. And considering his Norris record doesn't stand out to begin with, it really shows how bad this induction was. Also, why I'm not 100% convinced that defensive blueliner Leo Boivin was a worse induction than Housley, though he may have been.

In post 328 he asks if there ever was a HHOF Ddman with a worse playoff resume than Housley and indeed there are at least 2 in Howell and Flanman IMO.

It's kind of a moot point anyways as Housley was inducted due to his playoff resume he is in due to his elite regular season scoring and longevity in doing so.

Flaman was the best player on a Bruins team that lost in the Cup finals twice to the Habs dynasty of the 1950s, and he was praised in the press for his play. That alone is enough to dwarf Housley's playoff record. Hard to say with Howell, but I do know that posting their offensive stats from hockey-reference.com isn't a good way to show a rounded/leaning-towards-D blueliner was worse than a pure offensive defenseman.

 

[Kyle McMahon]

Recchi is one those weird guys, like Turgeon or today Giroux, that teams never did or would consider building around.

Even in his top offensive seasons was he ever really seriously considered as a top 10 forward in the world?

Yeah I'm inclined to agree. Recchi is one of those guys who's on-paper case is probably stronger than his " I remember watching his career" case. I never really felt like I was witnessing a first ballot HOFer in action.

Back around 2008 or so Recchi was considered borderline at best around here. The Boston Cup seemed to be the final feather in his cap that pushed him over the line into the HOF in a lot of people's eyes. Yet now a few years later it's considered a big snub that he isn't immediately in? That's a bit odd.

Recchi is a guy I probably wouldn't put in the HOF if I were in charge. But based on who else has been inducted at forward recently, it's tough to keep him out. He has a better case than Ciccarelli, and maybe Nieuwendyk. I might take him over Sundin.

 

[Sentinel]

I still can't get over the Makarov snub... again.

 

[Big Phil]

Yeah I'm inclined to agree. Recchi is one of those guys who's on-paper case is probably had a better career than Housely IMO) should be in the HHOF as well as Gonchar.

All 3 of these guys are better than Harry Howell who is also in the HHOF and is the answer to a worse playoff resume than Housley.

I'm pretty sure it was mentioned up thread but Housley was injured in that 18 game playoff run and that does affect his numbers.

Even then it's a better playoff resume than Harry Howell.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/players/h/howelha01.html

http://www.hockey-reference.com/players/h/houslph01.html

I'm not sure about Flaman. He was defensive, just like Howell, which will make their playoff resumes loo worse. Maybe Howell shouldn't be in. He's not the strongest choice. But does it not tell you something that these are the players Housley could be clinging to in order to prove a point?

 

[Kyle McMahon]

I'm not sure about Flaman. He was defensive, just like Howell, which will make their playoff resumes loo worse. Maybe Howell shouldn't be in. He's not the strongest choice. But does it not tell you something that these are the players Housley could be clinging to in order to prove a point?

Hmmm I think you accidentally mixed part of my post with part of Hardy's, BP.

 

[crobro]

Is Dino Ciccarelli in the HHOF?

600 + goals

How did Bill Barber get in the hall so early?

Mark Recchi should be a lock next year.

 

[Ishdul]

Is Dino Ciccarelli in the HHOF?

600 + goals

How did Bill Barber get in the hall so early?

Mark Recchi should be a lock next year.

Dino's in the Hall, unfortunately.

Barber was on the 70's Flyers teams, who were highly influential/well remembered but only had 2 obvious Hall of Fame picks in Clarke and Parent. I think they wanted a third Flyer and Barber held a little better than MacLeish and Leach.

 

[nwaZ*]

Recchi is a guy I probably wouldn't put in the HOF if I were in charge. But based on who else has been inducted at forward recently, it's tough to keep him out. He has a better case than Ciccarelli, and maybe Nieuwendyk. I might take him over Sundin.

Over Sundin? That's curious. He has tre cups, for sure, and did good in the playoffs. Slightly longer longevity. But Sundin was the man on the Leafs for a decade, and one of the best international players of all time. PPG over 1300 games where his prime was in the DPE.

But they're closer than what most people would think by just reading Recchi and Sundin next to each other.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Fern Flaman & Harry Howell

What are you considering when reaching that conclusion about Howell and Flaman's playoff records?

Howell was a defensive-minded guy on relatively weak teams. Have you read anything about him struggling in the postseason? Linking his hockey-reference page next to an offensive-minded guy doesn't really make sense to me.

Flaman was a defensive-minded guy on some very good teams. He won a Stanley Cup at the tail end of Toronto's dynasty and then made the finals two years in a row in Boston while making the 2nd All-Star Team each year. Again hockey-reference career stats aren't of much help here and while I haven't flipped through newspaper clippings of those playoffs, but I'd be surprised if he was a weak link on those teams.

Fern Flaman was arguably the 3rd - 5th best d-man in the NHL between 1955 and 1959. Check his Norris placements:

http://www.hockey-reference.com/players/f/flamafe01.html

Leader of the Bruins defence.

Harry Howell, won a Norris and post Doug Harvey was the only viable d-man on the Rangers.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/players/h/howelha01.html

 

[Big Phil]

Hmmm I think you accidentally mixed part of my post with part of Hardy's, BP.

I did, I blame Hardy for that, haha

Over Sundin? That's curious. He has tre cups, for sure, and did good in the playoffs. Slightly longer longevity. But Sundin was the man on the Leafs for a decade, and one of the best international players of all time. PPG over 1300 games where his prime was in the DPE.

But they're closer than what most people would think by just reading Recchi and Sundin next to each other.

I think Recchi is deserving, he is one of those underrated guys that you might not have particularly built around but he did so many things well and you always wanted him on your team. There was a 5 year span in the 1990s where only Oates and Gretzky outpointed him. So I think we forget that for a little while Recchi was an elite scorer. We may not think of him that way, but he was at one point.

With respect to Sundin, I think you probably would have picked him on your team over Recchi though. Sundin was a much rarer attribute, a 6'4" #1 center whose points didn't always reflect how good he was, despite being consistent year in and year out.

 

[Voight]

Barber was on the 70's Flyers teams, who were highly influential/well remembered but only had 2 obvious Hall of Fame picks in Clarke and Parent. I think they wanted a third Flyer and Barber held a little better than MacLeish and Leach.

Agreed here, thought I was the only one with this opinion.

I think he holds a lot better than the other too, especially Leach who was so obviously a product Of Clarke.

 

[seventieslord]

Also, why I'm not 100% convinced that defensive blueliner Leo Boivin was a worse induction than Housley, though he may have been.

my thoughts exactly.

 

[seventieslord]

Yeah I'm inclined to agree. Recchi is one of those guys who's on-paper case is probably stronger than his " I remember watching his career" case. I never really felt like I was witnessing a first ballot HOFer in action.

Back around 2008 or so Recchi was considered borderline at best around here. The Boston Cup seemed to be the final feather in his cap that pushed him over the line into the HOF in a lot of people's eyes. Yet now a few years later it's considered a big snub that he isn't immediately in? That's a bit odd.

Recchi is a guy I probably wouldn't put in the HOF if I were in charge. But based on who else has been inducted at forward recently, it's tough to keep him out. He has a better case than Ciccarelli, and maybe Nieuwendyk. I might take him over Sundin.

There's also been a bit of an awakening to just how strong his prime and peak are. For whatever reason, no one really realized this until many years later. Line him up against many other top end wingers based on total top-5, top-10, top-20 seasons and he looks very strong.

 

[Mayor Bee]

I'm convinced that a majority of the problems with inducted HOF members is simply twofold, both structural:

1) Too short of a waiting period. Three years is simply way too short of a time to allow for a proper perspective of a player's actual career.

2) The voting structure is absurd. A group of men sit in a boardroom and make these decisions, meaning that it's possible for one strong-willed person to persuade the room to follow him (a la Henry Fonda in "12 Angry Men"). Baseball has had the same issue with the Veterans Committee, particularly in the late 1960s and 1970s when Frankie Frisch would basically browbeat the room into voting for some truly absurd inductions.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

There's also been a bit of an awakening to just how strong his prime and peak are. For whatever reason, no one really realized this until many years later. Line him up against many other top end wingers based on total top-5, top-10, top-20 seasons and he looks very strong.

recchi is a weird case. i think if you asked anyone from '91 to gia first couple mtl years, by reputation they'd say "that guy is an elite scorer." hands down, until he went to mtl he was aming the best of the best.

but by the time he went back to philly, he was kind of a forgotten guy. so i think we're still looking back at his '91-'94 stretch and being surprised, like "wow, offensively he really was a whole notch better than the likes of robitaille, right there with the best four year stretches of bure, selanne, kariya, and those guys."

 

[Big Phil]

recchi is a weird case. i think if you asked anyone from '91 to gia first couple mtl years, by reputation they'd say "that guy is an elite scorer." hands down, until he went to mtl he was aming the best of the best.

but by the time he went back to philly, he was kind of a forgotten guy. so i think we're still looking back at his '91-'94 stretch and being surprised, like "wow, offensively he really was a whole notch better than the likes of robitaille, right there with the best four year stretches of bure, selanne, kariya, and those guys."

I think there was just such a logjam among forwards then too. Gretzky and Lemieux were king. Yzerman, Messier and Hull were other top guys. Then there were guys with big years like Mogilny, Lafontaine, Neely, etc. As is usually the case, right wing was competitive. Hull was the #1 guy during this time. Selanne, Neely, Mogilny and Bure were others although Mogilny really only had two big years. You may have thought of Fleury before Recchi at this time though too, yet the guy who was consistent all the time was Recchi, year in and year out. Maybe being on Mario's Penguins and then getting traded to a forgotten Flyers team didn't help. Either way, he was scoring with the best of them.