Is Stamkos a HOF lock?

[Albatros]

Speaking of prowess, where is the higher peak of Bure? He was flashier, but flashy and dull goals count all the same. He could have been better - yes, but HOF membership is a career accomplishment, it is based on what one did, not what one could have done, and this is why players get inducted after their career is over.

Arguably they do not count the same, the criteria remains:

"Playing ability, sportsmanship, character and contributions to his or her team or teams and to the game of hockey in general."

 

[El Travo]

I've never really given any thought towards him getting in but I certainly wouldn't be opposed to it. So long as he keeps up good numbers of course.

 

[6ix]

Stammer easily gets in. Has the hardware and there’s always a place in the HOF for all time great goal scorers.

 

[MadLuke]

Looking here:
NHL & WHA Yearly Leaders and Records for Goals | Hockey-Reference.com

Since the league started Ignila and Bondra are the only retired player that did lead the league in goal 2 times or more without being in the hall of fame.

Iginla will be, first-ballot.

That leave Bondra, Bondra has 0 top 10 point finish, Stamkos has 5 of those including 2 second place.

In the last 10 year's, Stamkos is

#2 in goal behind only an all time great.
#5 in points
#4 in PPG if we count the short span of McDavid

That make him arguably a Top 5 offensive forward for a 10 year's span, almost certainly top 7.

If around 1 forward by season that pass make the Hall, he should comfortably get in.

 

[Regal]

Stamkos was the best player for sure on his team in 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2015. Also, he was somewhat unlucky since he played with two of the best right wings in the NHL in the last 20 years.

St. Louis was arguably better in 2010 and definitely better in 2011. Johnson was also better in 2015

 

[Mathew Barzal]

Stamkos is already almost 30? Wow.

 

[Putt Pirate]

Eh. He probably does but will always be questioned until he wins a cup. Just the way it is. Especially with the stacked teams he has had and failed to lead them much of anywhere.

 

[RorschachWJK]

Everybody and their aunt are HOF locks these days. Especially if they're North American or deemed to be players of any significance to one of the franchises.

So the answer to OP: yes.

Should anyone care much? No.

 

[Ulysses31]

a cup would cerrainly help

 

[PattyLafontaine]

That's no insult.

Top-10 finishes in points
Stamkos 2, 2, 5, 5, 9
Bure 2, 3, 5, 7

Top-10 finishes in goals
Stamkos 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 4, 7
Bure 1, 1, 1, 3, 5

Hart voting
Stamkos 2, 6, 8, 11, 11
Bure 3, 9, 12

In fact, Bure is getting all possible credit for his talent and the time he missed when compared with Stamkos. Looking at career numbers, it begins to feel as if Stamkos had a better career.

Too fixated on numbers. Bure was appointment TV. It’s one of those things that’s hard to understand unless you experienced the era. Stamkos as good as he has been never captivated audiences like Bure.

Haven’t seen a player like Bure since he played.

 

[The Panther]

He's undoubtedly going into the Hall of Fame. There is no debate on this. If you don't believe me, just wait.

 

[solidmotion]

He's undoubtedly going into the Hall of Fame. There is no debate on this. If you don't believe me, just wait.

i agree, BUT: if he never wins a cup and develops an all-time terrible playoff reputation along the way then there's a chance he'll have to wait. i argued elsewhere that, based on the detroit 95-96 precedent, tampa didn't necessarily HAVE to win the cup this year... but they do have to win soon. a team that stacked never winning the cup would be unprecedented. which could keep otherwise deserving players out of the hall... maybe.

 

[canuck2010]

This is a terrible terrible take. You have obviously not watched Bure or were too young to watch him because hes easily the better overall player than Stamkos is.

Thanks for the compliment but for the record I'm 66. One aspect of his game was better, in fact that aspect was arguably the best ever but he did not play the game better than Stamkos overall. Two different players both deserving of the HOF

 

[Deen]

The hall of fame is suposed to be for Superstars. Stamkos is decent, but he's not THAT good.

 

[Better Call Sal]

People discrediting Stamkos are out of their minds.

Yes, he should absolutely be a Hall of Famer when he's done.

 

[Slyfox]

Easily. He's been the second-best goal scorer this generation

 

[RyderRocks73]

Easily. He's been the second-best goal scorer this generation

He's not even at 480 yet.

 

[sr edler]

Other than playoffs, it is hard to find any numbers backing Bure over Stamkos

Olympics. And if you're staring yourself blind on numbers you're doing it the wrong way. Try watching players play instead.

 

[justafan22]

Yes. He is but the lack of a cup may have some voters punishing him.

 

[RogerRoger]

The hall of fame is suposed to be for Superstars. Stamkos is decent, but he's not THAT good.

There's not enough superstar to fill the Hall then.

 

[Neutrinos]

 

[ManwithNoIdentity]

Of course all the bolts come to overrate him

No show in the playoffs and no cup? Good luck with that

 

[MAHJ71]

He'd get my vote. First ballot.

 

[Ace of Hades]

Other than playoffs, it is hard to find any numbers backing Bure over Stamkos
Take the lead over the field as an example (I do not think that players finishing 8th to 12th in the goal-scoring race were all that better in the 90s). Up top, sure - we had Lemieux, Gretzky and Jagr all playing back then.

% leads over #10 in goals
Bure 61-55-48-30-11
Stamkos 67-46-38-32-30-10-9

What does Bure have over Stamkos here? Three-year peak? I think the fact that Stamkos best four years were consecutive and the fact that he had one elite season extra (32% margin over #10) more than make up for that.

% leads over #10 in points
Bure 19-14-8-3
Stamkos 24-18-16-10-2

I know, linemates - but can we quantify that? It is not like Stamkos folded completely after MSL departed. They benefited from playing together, but isn't that an important trait of a great player - being able to gel with other great players? We have seen so many cases, especially in short international tournaments, when two great players have zero chemistry.

Speaking of prowess, where is the higher peak of Bure? He was flashier, but flashy and dull goals count all the same. He could have been better - yes, but HOF membership is a career accomplishment, it is based on what one did, not what one could have done, and this is why players get inducted after their career is over. Otherwise, why not induct McDavid tomorrow based on prowess?

What do you mean beside the playoffs? The playoffs are the biggest testatment to show what a player is capable of when everything is on the line where everyone is at their best with gripe tight defence. You don't reward Stanley cups through regular season. The fact is Bure showed up when games matter most and carried the Canucks to the 94 finals with a 4th liner as his winger, while Stamkos disappeared when things came physical playing for a historical stacked team and being sweeped as an underwhelming and ghost of a playoff performer.

Well Stamkos without St.Louis still had very good players to be play with, and actual defence that complimented his style. Bure never had any of that luxury. This shouldn't even be a debate. Most who follow hockey deem Bure to be a good deal better.

Bure had other attributes where he was better than Stamkos at. He played in a dead puck era scoring 60 goals with garbage linemates back to back seasons being relied the whole way is far better than any regular season performance from Stamkos.. Let that sink in. Bure played a different style of play than Stamkos did and was about speed, skill, goal scoring, being physical at times, and being all over the ice. So the whole Stamkos being a modern Bure is absolutely false.

As for overall prowess, Bure has that over Stamkos. McDavid will eventually get in the HOF pretty early in 5 or so years.

Stamkos will be inducted into the hall of fame, but the Bure comparisions are far off.

 

[Canadian Game]

The hall of fame is suposed to be for Superstars. Stamkos is decent, but he's not THAT good.

The Hall of Fame inductees get in based on their career, not present time.