Is Mark Recchi a First-Ballot HOFer?

[HFNHL Commish]

Relatively simple question. He enters this season as 13th among NHL points leaders (highest among active players), yet I don't feel he's ever enjoyed the periods of dominance of some of his contemporaries, Selanne being one.

Click to read more...

 

[Briere Up There*]

Really depends on who is eligible when he is. I think he's a HoFer, but it wouldn't be a crime to make him wait a few years. Unlike Oates and Gilmour.

 

[Rhiessan71]

Easily.
15 20+ goal seasons
Still playing and producing at 41
1500 points
2 Cups

No question what so ever.

 

[Psycho Papa Joe]

If I was building a team and knew I could have a guy for his entire career, I'd take Oates and Gilmour ahead of Mark Recchi. But I'd also take those guys ahead of Robitaille, Ciccarelli, Gartner, Federko, Neely, Gillies, Shutt and Barber as well, but what the hell do I know.

 

[Loto68]

I'll get the exact numbers later, but IIRC, Recchi led his teams in scoring the majority of years in the first half/three-quarters of his career.

 

[Fish on The Sand]

I don't think he should be in at all personally. I love him as a player, but he is the exact definition of points compiling. I'd put Turgeon in over him. He had a much bigger impact on the league.

 

[seventieslord]

That's a funny joke, Fish. Turgeon having a bigger impact on the league.

anyway... I don't subscribe to this whole "first ballot" thing. You're either a HHOFer or you're not.

And I believe Recchi is.

 

[Psycho Papa Joe]

I'd put Turgeon in over him.

I just threw up.

 

[DaveG]

Recchi's a Hall of Famer. Only thing that will keep him out his first year is if it's a phenomenal class to pick from. Think the 2007 or 2009 HoF classes there.

 

[Beukeboom Fan]

Easily.
15 20+ goal seasons
Still playing and producing at 41
1500 points
2 Cups

No question what so ever.

I disagree. I'd much rather induct a player with lesser stats but who was top 3-5 at his position for a portion of his career.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

I disagree. I'd much rather induct a player with lesser stats but who was top 3-5 at his position for a portion of his career.

to my eyes, recchi has the career numbers/achievements and was top 3-5 at his position in his prime.

post-season all-star voting:

'90-'91, 5th behind hull, neely, fleury, and larmer (0-12-13)
'91-'92, 2nd behind hull (0-29-9)
'92-'93, 5th behind selanne, mogilny, bure, and tocchet (1-3-16)
'93-'94, 4th behind bure, neely, and hull (1-5-11)
'99-'00, 4th behind jagr, bure, and nolan (0-1-19)

 

[NewEnglandSportsFan*]

I don't think he should be in at all personally. I love him as a player, but he is the exact definition of points compiling. I'd put Turgeon in over him. He had a much bigger impact on the league.

In the sane world, now, Recchi deserves to be a HoFer... for his sake I'd like to see 1st-ballot, but even if not, he'll get in relatively fast.

 

[Rhiessan71]

I disagree. I'd much rather induct a player with lesser stats but who was top 3-5 at his position for a portion of his career.

You just disqualified 75% of the Hall with that statement my friend.

 

[Fish on The Sand]

somebody once posted a list about what would make one a hall of famer.

Could a team win a cup with Recchi as their best player? I can comfortably say no team ever could have

Was he among the best in the league for a sustainable period of time? Never

Was he the best, or among the best in the league for a single season? One second team all star selection

Did he win any awards? None.

I'm sorry, but Recchi is not a hall of famer. I'd take a guy who played 10 years and was consistently putting up 90 points and in the top 5 than a guy who gutted it out for 20+ who was always a third tier player.

 

[Loto68]

I'll get the exact numbers later, but IIRC, Recchi led his teams in scoring the majority of years in the first half/three-quarters of his career.

Years he led his team in scoring:

1990-91: 113 points in 78 games (Penguins)
1992-93: 123 points in 84 games (Flyers)
1993-94: 107 Points in 84 games (Flyers)
1994-95: 43 Points in 39 games (Canadiens) Additional 5 points in 10 games with the Flyers before his trade
1997-98: 74 Points in 82 games (Canadiens)
1998-99: 47 Points in 61 games (Canadiens) Additional 6 points in 10 games after trade to the Flyers
1999-2000: 91 Points in 82 games (Flyers)
2000-01: 77 Points in 69 games (Flyers)
2003-04: 75 Points in 82 games (Flyers)
Additionally, he was 1 point off the team lead in 96-97 with the Canadiens: 80 in 82

Granted that a couple of years came when another player missed significant time with injury and that some years were mediocre at best, but he still was the best player.

 

[unknown33]

somebody once posted a list about what would make one a hall of famer.

Could a team win a cup with Recchi as their best player? I can comfortably say no team ever could have

Was he among the best in the league for a sustainable period of time? Never

Was he the best, or among the best in the league for a single season? One second team all star selection

Did he win any awards? None.

I'm sorry, but Recchi is not a hall of famer. I'd take a guy who played 10 years and was consistently putting up 90 points and in the top 5 than a guy who gutted it out for 20+ who was always a third tier player.

The HHoF does NOT follow the standards you mentioned.

Several player who do not match your criteria were inducted in the past 10 year like Ciccarelli, Anderson, Duff, Gillies, Federko, Gartner and Mullen.

 

[begbeee]

To me is Recchi not the first ballot and I would not a scream if he will not get in.
He is closer to Ciccarelli than it seems. Sure not a compiler but never ever was one of the bests.
Definetly a second tier star.

 

[Sens Rule]

somebody once posted a list about what would make one a hall of famer.

Could a team win a cup with Recchi as their best player? I can comfortably say no team ever could have

Was he among the best in the league for a sustainable period of time? Never

Was he the best, or among the best in the league for a single season? One second team all star selection

Did he win any awards? None.

I'm sorry, but Recchi is not a hall of famer. I'd take a guy who played 10 years and was consistently putting up 90 points and in the top 5 than a guy who gutted it out for 20+ who was always a third tier player.

Third tier player? Maybe now he is though he certainly was not for 15 years or so of his career. The HHOF inducts players that are not the best of the best. This is not the baseball HOF. Federko, Ciccarelli, Barber, Gartner, L Murphy and many, many others are in. Recchi would be better than at least a 3rd of those in the HHOF or maybe right in the middle of the pack. He does have a very decent peak 4 or 5 seasons and a long career of being a very, very effective player and he has had a ridiculously long career and is still an effective player, he is not compiling points now he is a very important part of a playoff team getting 15+ Mins a night.

 

[seventieslord]

Was he among the best in the league for a sustainable period of time? Never.

Of course he was. Recchi was one of the top scorers of the 1990s while playing an adequate defensive game and displaying tons of effort and heart. He also won a cup in the decade and led the league in assists in 2000.

Throughout the 1990s (which was Jagr's best period, too) Recchi scored jsut 10% fewer points per game than Jagr.

To me is Recchi not the first ballot and I would not a scream if he will not get in.
He is closer to Ciccarelli than it seems. Sure not a compiler but never ever was one of the bests.
Definetly a second tier star.

closer to Ciccarelli in what way? I hope you mean that he's better. He's far better.

 

[Big Phil]

No, not a first ballot, but then again he'll likely get in anyway so there isn't much of a difference.

Look, Recchi is a guy that bugs you. I could flip flop all day with him. On one hand you look at his numbers and longevity and figure there is no possible way to keep him out of the HHOF. On the other hand my eyes tell me he was never as good as his numbers suggest.

Top 10 scoring finishes: 3, 4, 7, 10

That's pretty good. Guys have gotten into the HHOF with those finishes before. Throw in the two Cups as well.

But other things bother me about the guy. He was critical to the Pens first Cup in 1991. Then he's traded. The Pens win again in 1992. He goes through several years of being a Marc Savard clone (in other words, high finishes in scoring but no playoff appearances). He is in the playoffs once in his first 6 seasons.

Then he never really has an identity either with a team. Is he a Hab? A Flyer? A Penguin? He was bounced around a lot and I know Oates had his fair share of teams too but with Recchi it's almost like he was a prototypical supplementary player who compiled a lot and didn't really contribute the way you'd want him to. Glenn Anderson he was not IMO.

Another thing, when Canada had international tournaments he wasn't there. 1991, nope. 1996, nope. 1998 he was invited only when Kariya went down with an injury. 2002, nope. He wasn't a center, he was RW. You'd think teams would be salivating for him right? Then you look at guys like Anderson and Gartner who always got invited during their primes.

Lastly, he was never an elite player. Okay guys like Francis got into the HHOF with this same concept too but Francis was better for longer too and I think better at his best. With Recchi you get the feeling that he fits the bill as a player who had a good batting average but with little runs batted in if you get my drift. That describes him accurately IMO.

That being said can his career be ignored? Probably not and since I am really on the fence neither way bothers me

 

[Fish on The Sand]

Of course he was. Recchi was one of the top scorers of the 1990s while playing an adequate defensive game and displaying tons of effort and heart. He also won a cup in the decade and led the league in assists in 2000.

Throughout the 1990s (which was Jagr's best period, too) Recchi scored jsut 10% fewer points per game than Jagr.



closer to Ciccarelli in what way? I hope you mean that he's better. He's far better.

10% ppg is a substantial difference. Over the course of a season that is roughly 20 points. I sincerely doubt that anybody considered Recchi a top 10 player in the game at any point in his career, outside of perhaps the 2000 season where he led the league in assists.

 

[Fish on The Sand]

Third tier player? Maybe now he is though he certainly was not for 15 years or so of his career. The HHOF inducts players that are not the best of the best. This is not the baseball HOF. Federko, Ciccarelli, Barber, Gartner, L Murphy and many, many others are in. Recchi would be better than at least a 3rd of those in the HHOF or maybe right in the middle of the pack. He does have a very decent peak 4 or 5 seasons and a long career of being a very, very effective player and he has had a ridiculously long career and is still an effective player, he is not compiling points now he is a very important part of a playoff team getting 15+ Mins a night.

I had a feeling third tier would set off some confusion and what I mean by that is that any given era had tiers of players

The top tier would obviously be the best of the best. Jagr, Lemieux, Hasek, Fedorov and perhaps Lidstrom in the 90s, but certainly Lidstrom in the 2000s.

The second tier would include guys who were very good, but not quite the elite of the elite. So guys like Selanne, Sakic, Pronger etc.

The third tier are guys who were very good, but you wouldn't build a team around. Recchi, Leclair, Palffy etc.

For me, only tier 1 players are locks and it is only tier two guys that deserve consideration beyond that. Unless somebody in the third tier did something extraordinary that transcended the sport, then they don't deserve consideration imo. Hall of fame is about the best of the best, not good players who played for a long ass time.

 

[Big Phil]

10% ppg is a substantial difference. Over the course of a season that is roughly 20 points. I sincerely doubt that anybody considered Recchi a top 10 player in the game at any point in his career, outside of perhaps the 2000 season where he led the league in assists.

I don't know, now that I think of it even in 2000 he just kind of came from nowhere to be the league leader in assists. He had a poor 1999 season and for some reason things came together in 2000 for him.

Even at that time you'd have to say

Jagr, Bure, Yzerman, Modano, Sakic, Nolan, Kariya, Pronger, Lidstrom and maybe even Shanahan and Selanne are ahead of him in 2000. He's no better than a bubble top 10 player

 

[Briere Up There*]

I had a feeling third tier would set off some confusion and what I mean by that is that any given era had tiers of players

The top tier would obviously be the best of the best. Jagr, Lemieux, Hasek, Fedorov and perhaps Lidstrom in the 90s, but certainly Lidstrom in the 2000s.

The second tier would include guys who were very good, but not quite the elite of the elite. So guys like Selanne, Sakic, Pronger etc.

The third tier are guys who were very good, but you wouldn't build a team around. Recchi, Leclair, Palffy etc.

For me, only tier 1 players are locks and it is only tier two guys that deserve consideration beyond that. Unless somebody in the third tier did something extraordinary that transcended the sport, then they don't deserve consideration imo. Hall of fame is about the best of the best, not good players who played for a long ass time.

That's an odd tier system, I'm assuming the 1990s? Why are Selanne and Sakic behind Fedorov and Lidstrom?

 

[Fish on The Sand]

That's an odd tier system, I'm assuming the 1990s? Why are Selanne and Sakic behind Fedorov and Lidstrom?

Selanne and Sakic never reached the level of pure dominance that Fedorov and Lidstrom did, however I did say Lidstrom was a borderline case for the 1990s, as he didn't truly peak until the 2000s. If I expand the scope to the 2000s then Sakic gets a substantial bump, but still stays in the 2nd tier. All of those guys played their best years, or at least significant parts of their best years, at the same time Recchi had his, and all I would say were unquestionably better, until of course the third tier guys like Palffy and Leclair, and then you get some debate. (FWIW I take Recchi over both)