Hockey Hall of Fame 2017

[The Panther]

The two main knocks against him;

1) Sitting on the bench during the Punch Up in Piestany during the WJC...

Sadly, you are right. I never understood how that's a knock against a player. The team went there to win the gold, and by engaging in an illegal punch-up they also gave up the chance to win. Turgeon was the only smart guy.


I also think Damphousse is borderline and might deserve a place. He was the real deal. But the competition is fierce and his playing for 4 or 5 teams through his prime might make it harder. I've pointed out before that Damphousse led THREE Canadian franchises in scoring, which must be unique.

 

[Voight]

Selanne and Kariya so they can go in together.

Then I'd put one or two of CuJo, Thomas, Recchi & Theo Fleury in.

 

[Voight]

I also think Damphousse is borderline and might deserve a place. He was the real deal. But the competition is fierce and his playing for 4 or 5 teams through his prime might make it harder. I've pointed out before that Damphousse led THREE Canadian franchises in scoring, which must be unique.

0 top 10 finishes in anything of note, and he doesn't qualify for the Gainey excuses of being a superb two-way/defensive player, aside from his one 4th place Selke finish.

1990-1994 he was some decent AST voting finishes but thats really it.

 

[MXD]

Damphousse's main calling card for the Hockey Hall of Fame is probably that he was a Stanley Cup winner leading scorer/best forward. Not many of them aren't in the Hockey Hall of Fame (on top of my head, Billy Boucher, Paul Thompson x 2, Mats Naslund, Stephane Richer; maybe somebody did this on one of the Cup winners in the 2nd half of the sixties, but the best player was Beliveau anyways. That comment could apply to Boucher as well).

Damphousse has a better case than all of them except Thompson.

 

[Killion]

If the HoF starts focusing more on the character/fame aspect, what about players like Bob Probert or Tiger Williams?

Should the establishment recognize hockey's rough and tumble past? Will they? Seems unlikely for at least the near future while the league is still moving toward a fight-free world, but maybe once that transformation is complete, and that version of the NHL is completely a thing of the past?

I dont see that ever happening overg, induction of "Protection, Policemen, Muscle" (I dont like the term g00n) or whatever they've been variously called & classified over the past 100yrs into the HHOF. I dont think the HHOF has even set up displays in the building itself, video's etc of "Greatest Fights & Fighters of All Time" type dealeo. Marketed themselves, catered to fans who appreciate that aspect of the game & the players who were the best at it. Not that Im aware of. And ya, Id say your quite correct that with the ongoing & pending litigation over concussions & CTE, the creation of the Instigator Rule & just generally move away from, discouraging fighting over the past 10yrs, deaths of players... not something the NHL would particularly which to glorify, even openly admit to promoting, facilitating & enabling despite that aspect being a big part of the pro game for most of its history, an aspect of the game that the NHL did in fact promote, facilitate & enable, demanded of its players. Built their business upon it throughout the 20th & early 21st Centuries.

 

[jappzilla]

Watched that video on NHL.com about eventuall inductees. Osgood and Andreychuk came up.

Similar to Housley I think both will eventually make it, even if it might take a decade or more.

Saw some poster on facebook honestly saying it was a shame that Lindros got inducted before "a great player like Andreychuk".

 

[ResilientBeast]

Recchi
Selanne
Kariya
XXX

 

[The Panther]

0 top 10 finishes in anything of note, and he doesn't qualify for the Gainey excuses of being a superb two-way/defensive player, aside from his one 4th place Selke finish.

1990-1994 he was some decent AST voting finishes but thats really it.

Well, I said he was borderline. As MXD pointed out, he led a Stanley Cup winner in scoring, which is no small change (but then again, so did Craig Simpson).

From 1989-90 through 1996-97, Damphousse was 13th in NHL scoring, so, yeah, borderline based on offense only.

I think the onset of the Dead-puck era, combined with his turning 30, kind of ended him as an elite player a bit prematurely.

 

[DoobeeDoobeeDoo]

Mark Recchi was robbed.

500+ goals & 1,500+ points should be automatic HOF.

 

[MXD]

Well, I said he was borderline. As MXD pointed out, he led a Stanley Cup winner in scoring, which is no small change (but then again, so did Craig Simpson).

I was actually referring to leading his team in regular season.
`

But I'll be even more restrictive : On top of my head, there's only three players who led a Stanley Cup winning team both in playoffs scoring and reg season scoring the year they won the Cup : Damphousse, Naslund and Richer (and so long for saying playing for the Habs help your HHOF chances).

 

[Voight]

Well, I said he was borderline. As MXD pointed out, he led a Stanley Cup winner in scoring, which is no small change (but then again, so did Craig Simpson).

From 1989-90 through 1996-97, Damphousse was 13th in NHL scoring, so, yeah, borderline based on offense only.

I think the onset of the Dead-puck era, combined with his turning 30, kind of ended him as an elite player a bit prematurely.

Again, he was a good compiler like Marleau for example, but he was never elite.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

i am guessing many will disagree but i have damphousse right there with the wildly overrated brind'amour. just south of the hhof line mind you, but damphousse was great, as was rod the bod.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

now let me start by saying that i have accepted turgeon as a hall of famer. after housley, it is a given. maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, but someday and for the rest of our lives. it'll be the same with vince carter. too many points, too many high finishes, too much of a legitimate A-level offensive star (as seventieslord has done a nice job of constantly pointing out), even if you'd rather have damphousse or, in basketball manu ginobili, 100 times out of a 100.

Good year to induce Pierre Turgeon before we can't anymore, imo.

nice choice of words. like in my younger days when i had too much to drink and had class the next morning and needed a good night sleep so i...

Yes, Id certainly put his name forward as well yet its one we rarely if ever hear. He did live up to his billing & status as a #1 Pick, career points really pretty dazzling considering he never got the opportunity to play for a really decent team. Had he, like maybe a Detroit or Colorado, his induction an automatic... The two main knocks against him;

1) Sitting on the bench during the Punch Up in Piestany during the WJC...
2) Critics suggesting he was an "incomplete player" because of that (#1) along with defensive shortcomings...

However, look at who he played for?... and even then, when he was on the ice you werent going to be playing offence, you were going to be very worried about Pierre & playing a cautious game of Defence. This guy wracked up the points at a clip of something like 1.03 per game, better than a considerable number of others who youd never think twice about as being HHOF'rs.

Sadly, you are right. I never understood how that's a knock against a player. The team went there to win the gold, and by engaging in an illegal punch-up they also gave up the chance to win. Turgeon was the only smart guy.

do people really hold piestany against turgeon? i don't see it. i mean, he had a much more visible 20 year NHL career on which to judge him on. and all those things people said about turgeon, as killion says above, that he was soft, that he didn't really exert himself on defense, that didn't take charge as a leader and captain, that he rarely stepped up the way a franchise center of his abilities was expected to a la joe sakic or even a guy like jeremy roenick, i think that's much more why his career left a bad taste in people's mouths. i mean, eric lindros was a much bigger (and much more memorable) pos when he was eighteen and he's in the hall of fame now. because we remember what happened on the ice during their real, adult careers.

but that said, let's look at the facts about piestany, just for the sake of accuracy. was the the "only smart" one? well, not exactly. jimmy waite and steve nemeth both also did not fight. the difference? according to stephane roy (the guy who was kicked in the head), steve nemeth was out there holding guys to try to avoid mismatches and nemeth was the one to come to roy's aid. according to everyone on that team, including coaching staff, turgeon sat on the bench and presumably pissed his pants.

so let's not go crazy talking about how turgeon was smart or honorable or a conscientious objector or whatever. once the fight started no amount of sitting on the bench and being the "only smart" guy is going to get your team not disqualified so you might as well at least go out there and try to help make sure no one gets hurt, or even just to help make sure no one on your own team gets hurt. history is full of heroes who conducted themselves with honour when things get out of hand, for instance rasheed wallace during the malice in the palace. i don't think applauding the actions of a nemeth or a sheed while calling turgeon actions what they rightfully were is exactly an endorsement of violence or old school cave man thinking.

 

[seventieslord]

FTR, Turgeon strikes me much more like an Adam Foote level induction than Phil Housley - very good at his primary function, not so good in more "forgivable" areas.

I don't know who else to use as a comparison because whoever I do (Lowe, Foote, Hatcher) is not a HHOFer, IMO.

I just kinda object to Housley being the guy to use, because he sucked at doing what he was supposed to do, and was excellent at the "bonus". You want a defenseman to defend, and it's a bonus when he scores like that. You want a star center to score just like Turgeon did, and when he can lead and play some defense that's a bonus.

 

[MXD]

FTR, Turgeon strikes me much more like an Adam Foote level induction than Phil Housley - very good at his primary function, not so good in more "forgivable" areas.

I don't know who else to use as a comparison because whoever I do (Lowe, Foote, Hatcher) is not a HHOFer, IMO.

I just kinda object to Housley being the guy to use, because he sucked at doing what he was supposed to do, and was excellent at the "bonus". You want a defenseman to defend, and it's a bonus when he scores like that. You want a star center to score just like Turgeon did, and when he can lead and play some defense that's a bonus.

Restricting "primary function" -- Peter Bondra, maybe?

And i know it's not quite right either.

 

[seventieslord]

Restricting "primary function" -- Peter Bondra, maybe?

And i know it's not quite right either.

right, because I'm trying to think of a defenseman (not forward) that makes more sense.

Maybe Harvey Pulford?

 

[Killion]

Maybe Harvey Pulford?

Yeah, thats a good comparison.... trivia.... after retiring, took up Refereeing.... was given an option on buying the Ottawa Senators in 1933, moving them to Baltimore Maryland but the deal fell through.

 

[MXD]

right, because I'm trying to think of a defenseman (not forward) that makes more sense.

Maybe Harvey Pulford?

Flaman?

 

[MS]

Selanne is obviously going in, and would be a good time to induct Kariya as well.

Alfredsson will get in eventually, but I suspect they'll add him to the 'waiting' list and take Recchi off that list and induct him.

 

[StDevs]

Of these player I feel only Selanne, Alfredsson are locks with Koivu getting in at some point down the line. Everyone else belongs in the Hall of Very Good, not the HHOF (except for Kaberle, who wouldn't make that fictitious hall).

Imo Kaberle has one of the better chances of the mentioned player of getting in since he was one of the best offensive defensemen of the 2000s. Selänne is the only lock, Alfredsson has a strong case, Khabibulin has a slim chance of ever making it and Kaberle almost none at all. The rest hasn't been good enough for a longer period of time to be considered. And I say that although Smyth, Koivu and Bertuzzi are some of my favourite players of all time.

 

[Ducks in a row]

I would love to see Selanne and Kariya go in at the same time. That will be sweet

Totally agree would be great so great.

 

[creg78*]

Theo Fleury.

 

[trentmccleary]

Selanne, Kariya and somebody else, preferably not Alfie. Not this time, not ever either.

Damphousse's main calling card for the Hockey Hall of Fame is probably that he was a Stanley Cup winner leading scorer/best forward. Not many of them aren't in the Hockey Hall of Fame (on top of my head, Billy Boucher, Paul Thompson x 2, Mats Naslund, Stephane Richer; maybe somebody did this on one of the Cup winners in the 2nd half of the sixties, but the best player was Beliveau anyways. That comment could apply to Boucher as well).

Damphousse has a better case than all of them except Thompson.

It seems inconsistent to argue for Damphousse, but against Alfredsson.

Feat|Alfredssson|Damphousse
T-10 Pts| 4, 7, 9|N/A
T-10 G| 9, 9, 9|N/A
T-10 PPG| 3, 4, 9|N/A
70+ pt seasons|10|8
PPG+seasons|8|5
Awards| Calder, Clancy, Messier, 2nd AST, ASGx6|ASGx3
Hart| 5, 16, 16, 17|N/A
Selke| 4, 10, 11, 15, 20|4
Byng|2, 4, 6, 8, 9, 10, etc|9
Career|1246-444-713-1157, 0.93|1378-432-773-1205, 0.87
Era Adjusted|1246-492-769-1261, 1.01|1378-422-771-1193, 0.86
Playoffs|124-51-49-100, 0.81|140-41-63-104, 0.74
Playoffs|0 SC, 1 SCF|1 SC, 0 SCF

Other
Alfredsson
16th in all time Olympics scoring with 26-13-14-27. Led 2006 Gold Medal winning Sweden in goals and points.
Led NHL playoffs in goals, GWG and points when Ottawa made Stanley Cup Finals, 2007.

Damphousse
Led the Canadiens in scoring when they won the Cup, finishing 4th in playoff scoring.

It's usually not a good sign when the guy who played during the 1980's-90's didn't outscore the deadpuck era guy with unadjusted stats.

3 more wins isn't anywhere near enough to make Damphousse's career comparable to Alfredsson's.

 

[seventieslord]

It seems inconsistent to argue for Damphousse, but against Alfredsson.

Feat|Alfredssson|Damphousse
T-10 Pts| 4, 7, 9|N/A
T-10 G| 9, 9, 9|N/A
T-10 PPG| 3, 4, 9|N/A
70+ pt seasons|10|8
PPG+seasons|8|5
Awards| Calder, Clancy, Messier, 2nd AST, ASGx6|ASGx3
Hart| 5, 16, 16, 17|N/A
Selke| 4, 10, 11, 15, 20|4
Byng|2, 4, 6, 8, 9, 10, etc|9
Career|1246-444-713-1157, 0.93|1378-432-773-1205, 0.87
Era Adjusted|1246-492-769-1261, 1.01|1378-422-771-1193, 0.86
Playoffs|124-51-49-100, 0.81|140-41-63-104, 0.74
Playoffs|0 SC, 1 SCF|1 SC, 0 SCF

Other
Alfredsson
16th in all time Olympics scoring with 26-13-14-27. Led 2006 Gold Medal winning Sweden in goals and points.
Led NHL playoffs in goals, GWG and points when Ottawa made Stanley Cup Finals, 2007.

Damphousse
Led the Canadiens in scoring when they won the Cup, finishing 4th in playoff scoring.

It's usually not a good sign when the guy who played during the 1980's-90's didn't outscore the deadpuck era guy with unadjusted stats.

3 more wins isn't anywhere near enough to make Damphousse's career comparable to Alfredsson's.

Wow, that's pretty eye opening. I'll also add, winger vs (mostly) center.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

i think the problem with staking damphousse's case on him being the top scorer on the '93 habs is that most people would still have him as the third most important forward on that team, behind muller and carbonneau.

and while damphousse was always a good two-way player, he wasn't an excellent two-way player yet; that came later as he started to play more center. the elite guy at both ends on that team was muller, all day every day.