Big Phil
Registered User
- Nov 2, 2003
- 31,703
- 4,145
so true. we totally romanticize non-scorers just below the HHOF bar, but piss all over those just above it. when he got inducted he immediately went from living legend to terrible fraud.
like, imagine if tikkanen were to shockingly get inducted this year. it would be the same for him. he would go from (rightfully) being remembered as a star-level role player and totally original and unique player to being called a shotgun rider and a product of his superstar linemates.
i don't think gillies ever puts on his fist full of cup rings with his HHOF ring on the thumb and worries about what some weirdos on the internet are typing about him though.
That being said, I still don't think he should be in the HHOF. I like a lot of players in NHL history that I don't think belong in the HHOF. Joe Nieuwendyk doesn't belong, but I liked him and would gladly have him on my team as a 2nd line center. Phil Esposito in his book said that the Hall doesn't mean as much to him anymore because they've let in too many guys that shouldn't have gotten in. I don't know where Phil's barometer lies, but I think we all think this way to an extent. It would be nicer if it were a little more exclusive, making the induction that much more special. Maybe on the level of baseball? Or even a shade easier than that. It still beats the current precedent.
Is Gillies one of those players where if you strap him up to a polygraph he'll admit he doesn't truly belong? There has to be some honoured members in there that have to admit even they were surprised at their nomination. I don't mean modest ones that are still deserving, I mean guys that probably wouldn't have even voted for themselves. Paul Henderson for example says he wouldn't induct himself.