Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
I'm keeping the three other guys I voted for (Cleghorn, Benedict, Bowie).
My other vote is "available", and quite frankly, it will take very good arguments for two or three specific guys in order to make me change that vote.
I expected Round 3 to be the round where I'd start to push for Hobey Baker, but I'd thought there would be 5 inductees instead of 3...
Baker doesn't make my version of the Hall for players for reasons listed below.
I pushed for Dan Bain last round, not based on a statistical analysis but what his stellar play did for the game of hockey, popularizing it west of Ontario. What is a hall of fame? A Hall of fame is a museum and I believe a hall of fame should consider subjective arguments based on historical significance; otherwise, how is this any different from the all time draft, or the top-100 players list? I understand that historical significance is a slippery slope, but in this era specifically I believe it’s important. If not, what you will see is pre-WWI and nineteenth century players as left over’s to decide between at the end of the early era of voting.
Yes, best remaining player(s) is usually the correct decision, but there needs to be some leeway.
Bain, Benedict, Bowie, and Cleghorn is probably my vote unless I can be persuaded.
I'm using the criteria for players on what they actually did on the ice and saving some of the "he did this to help spread the game" and other similar arguments for a builders category.
With this criteria Bain still makes it because of his impact on Stanley Cup play and the limited number of seasons won't hold players back on m,my list until players started doing it more regularly.
That being said I'm not sure how long it will take Bain to get in with the way things are going here maybe round 42?