Is Brodeur hurting his legacy?

[Xirik]

Why do these threads always turn into posts about how just because Brodeur and NJ owned them for years they now have to Insult and demonize everything he does. All those post just reek jealousy and envy.

I to the people who bring up his PERSONAL life, I have one thing to say to you.

let him who is without sin, cast the first stone

It's pathetic to judge someone when all of us probably smell like a dusty old colon.

 

[SmellOfVictory]

Why do these threads always turn into posts about how just because Brodeur and NJ owned them for years they now have to Insult and demonize everything he does. All those post just reek jealousy and envy.

I to the people who bring up his PERSONAL life, I have one thing to say to you.

let him who is without sin, cast the first stone

It's pathetic to judge someone when all of us probably smell like a dusty old colon.

You're seriously defending a guy for cheating on his wife? LOL.

 

[The Macho King]

Why do these threads always turn into posts about how just because Brodeur and NJ owned them for years they now have to Insult and demonize everything he does. All those post just reek jealousy and envy.

I to the people who bring up his PERSONAL life, I have one thing to say to you.

let him who is without sin, cast the first stone

It's pathetic to judge someone when all of us probably smell like a dusty old colon.

As an aside from the rest of the topic - that's such a ******** argument. There are objective bad acts committed by people, and it's totally not an issue to judge them on it. Hell, our entire criminal justice system relies on people judging others.

Still shouldn't touch his reputation as a hockey player, but considering the details of the divorce are public, it's also totally fine to bring up as a possible reason why he's still playing despite the fact he's also collecting social security.

 

[ForumNamePending]

No... Even if it ends in total disaster the strongest reaction the vast majority of people will have towards Brodeur's time with the Blues 5 years from now is a shrug and perhaps a 'meh'.

 

[danisonfire]

No... Even if it ends in total disaster the strongest reaction the vast majority of people will have towards Brodeur's time with the Blues 5 years from now is a shrug and perhaps a 'meh'.

I do not remember Mats Sundin as a Vancouver Canuck, I remember him as the Toronto Maple Leafs captain.

I do not remember Ray Bourque as a part of the Colorado Avalanche, as much as I remember him as the Boston Bruins captain. For this, I do of course remember him winning the stanley cup in his final year as a member of the Colorado Avalanche.

It will vary from person to person due the subjective nature of the question. I will certainly shrug it off as "meh".

The cheating on his wife part, is not acceptable by our societies current laws and social contracts. These will of course change with time as well.

 

[WordsOfWisdumb*]

Its all about those 700 wins now. Hopefully he can get them.

Before he hits 700 losses anyway.

 

[ThatQuietGuy93]

Nopers

 

[Roomtemperature]

You're seriously defending a guy for cheating on his wife? LOL.

An athlete cheated on his wife... what a rare occurrence that is.

 

[TheOtherScott]

I think it strengthens his legacy. He could rest on his laurels and retire to a guaranteed Hall of Fame spot, but instead he's refusing to go quietly. He's risking his reputation to go out on top, and that's admirable in my opinion.

 

[Trottier]

I think it strengthens his legacy. He could rest on his laurels and retire to a guaranteed Hall of Fame spot, but instead he's refusing to go quietly. He's risking his reputation to go out on top, and that's admirable in my opinion.

Good man.

Quitter quit.

And/or sit around judging the "legacy" of others?

Others do. Or at least, damn try.

 

[MLSE]

The same way no one respects the legacy of Michael Jordan, Willie Mays or the countless others who hung on in their twilight and played for another team in those last year(s)

Speak for yourself. Wizards Mike gets a lot of respect from me.

 

[Jossipov]

No ..

 

[Beerfish]

No not at all. The Beliveaus are the the exception to the rule. Most aging great players end up playing out the string somewhere other than the team they are known for.

 

[mikethelegacy]

Is anyone still reading this website?

 

[hockey4sale]

not really, I for one even forgot he is still in the game, in my mind I'll always remember the great MB from 10 years ago

 

[Made Dan]

Not even close.

Alright mate.

 

[TNT87]

Not at all. No one will remember him for playing for the Blues just like Gretzky.

 

[None Shall Pass]

It's funny.

"Legacy" is almost never brought up among hockey fans I've talked to in person / read on here. Sure, there's plenty of people wondering if he's good enough to keep playing (Probably warranted) but no one wondering about his legacy.

The only people I see wondering about Marty's legacy are people writing articles about Marty's legacy.

It's silly. When you look back on Marty's career ten or twenty years from now, are you going to think of his time on the Blues? (No offense Blues fans). Or are you going to think of his achievements in Jersey?

 

[Wolfpuck]

No.

Not at all. No one will remember him for playing for the Blues just like Gretzky.

They will if he hits 700 with them.

 

[Ralphy*]

Even if he miraculously played 10 more seasons in the NHL, he'd still be a hall-of-famer and one of the best goalies of all-time.

 

[Osprey]

I think citing historical examples in one sentence is a good argument.

Stupid opinions don't require a lot of effort to rebut. The guy holds a ton of records and has 4 Vezinas/3 Cups - I don't need four paragraphs to point out that playing for another team for a season or two won't do away to that and any argument to the contrary is stupid.

The strength of an argument isn't measured by your conviction behind it and how much you're convinced that you're right. You may be right and stating an unquestionable truth, but one sentence is not a good argument. You may as well say, "OJ is a double murderer and I don't need four paragraphs to prove it." You're not necessarily wrong, but you're not making a good argument.

 

[bluefan]

lmao, these "HFpartner" articles seem nothing more than clickbait.

 

[Roomtemperature]

The strength of an argument isn't measured by your conviction behind it and how much you're convinced that you're right. You may be right and stating an unquestionable truth, but one sentence is not a good argument. You may as well say, "OJ is a double murderer and I don't need four paragraphs to prove it." You're not necessarily wrong, but you're not making a good argument.

Brodeur is in the class of athlete as Willie Mays, Johnny Unitas, and Joe Montana and no one thinks lesser of their legacy because they spent a season or two in their twilight on another team.

There one sentenceI think my point is made. Brevity is the soul of wit.

 

[OzzyFan]

Why do these threads always turn into posts about how just because Brodeur and NJ owned them for years they now have to Insult and demonize everything he does. All those post just reek jealousy and envy.

I to the people who bring up his PERSONAL life, I have one thing to say to you.

let him who is without sin, cast the first stone

It's pathetic to judge someone when all of us probably smell like a dusty old colon.

Do I sense Pride?

How many people here do you think cheat on their wife? Let alone with their kid's nanny?

Brodeur got what he deserved for that financially and publicly. Brodeur may be one of the greatest goalies to ever play the game, but it doesn't mean people also can't see him for the adulterer he was. Same with Roy. Roy was arguably the greatest goalie of all time, but people will still remember he married a stripper and was accused of "domestic violence"(and his obvious short/hot temper).

 

[Hammettf2b]

Why would people think it hurts his legacy as a Devil or just a player? Hasn't history proven that enough already that it doesn't hurt any legacy?