Mike Gartner: Why Is He In The HHOF?

[BM67]

Gordie Howe never scored 50 goals, and only had one 100 point season.

Consistency is a MAJOR factor when talking about players. And they didnt come much more consistent than Gartner.

In his early Cap years, they struggled. The Caps got better near the end of his Caps career, but they werent exactly world beaters. After that he played for lowly Minnesota. He was then traded away by the NYR at the 1994 trade deadline (poor guy).

And while his playoff numbers werent great, they arent bad either.

I just think people who are against it are simply being way too critical. I am going to sound very redundant in this argument...but...708 goals. You dont really need to say anything more.

Gordie Howe scored 49 goals and led the league by 17 over the runner-up. Gartner scored 50 and trailed the leader by 23.

Gordie scored 95 points leading the league by a 24 point margin and set a single season point record. Gartner scored 102 points and was 10th in league scoring, trailing the leader by 106 points.

Howe scored 15 goals and 41 points at the age of 51, when Gartner was scoring 36 goals and 68 points at the age of 20 in his first NHL season after spending a year in the WHA.

 

[silver_made*]

And another thing. Marcel Dionne and Mike Gartner have very similar careers. I know Dionne won a Hart Trophy once. But I dont see anyone arguing the validity of Dionne being in the Hall? Neither guy has a cup, and Dionne personally didnt rack up many major awards. Where is the line between Dionne and Gartner that nobody seems to mind that Dionne is in? But Gartner? Hold up...not quite.

Regular Season Pts/Game
Dionne: 1.31
Gartner: 0.93
*Dionne with far more points in less games

Regular Season Goals/Game
Dionne: 0.54
Gartner: 0.49
*Dionne w/ more goals in less games

Post-Season Pts/Game
Dionne: 0.92
Gartner: 0.76

Gartner was average and apparently the Hall recognizes mediocrity. 1 season of 100+ points during the RHI era of the NHL? Give me a break. His goal totals are the result of "consistency" over playing for an eternity. So, I say we nominate Joe Cirella for the Hall next!

 

[Bring Back Bucky]

You really need to make up your mind. Is the hockey hall of fame too LENIENT because it includes a guy who scored 30 goals 17 times and is sixth or whatever in goals all-time, plus was known as the fastest skater in the NHL for several years , or is it too strict because it won't let in Bernie Nicholls, who was never known as being outstanding at anything???

 

[David Puddy]

Gartner was average and apparently the Hall recognizes mediocrity.

That comment is moronic and disgraceful! How was Gartner an average! Are you saying that he was average among all players in the league? Average guys don't even last in the NHL for 19 seasons, plus a year in the WHA.

You were arguing for Bernie Nicholls to inducted into the Hockey Hall of Fame last week, and now you think Gartner should be removed.

 

[bruins4777*]

.....apparently consistency is something easily reached
I mean 30 goals in every season except one isn't just mediocre its pitiful. Lafontaine is a piece of crap also why's he in there? 30 goals is so easy to reach nowadays...700 goals? pffft, so what he's never been dominant. Who cares if he's one of 6 players to reach 700, he blows.
[/end saracastic rant]

 

[silver_made*]

That comment is moronic and disgraceful! How was Gartner an average! Are you saying that he was average among all players in the league? Average guys don't even last in the NHL for 19 seasons, plus a year in the WHA.

You were arguing for Bernie Nicholls to inducted into the Hockey Hall of Fame last week, and now you think Gartner should be removed.

i never said removed, but why so unanimous? all he has on his side is #'s, and when you weigh factors like # of 50 goal seasons (1), # of 100 pt. seasons (1) over his career (played almost entirely during 12-7 hockey games), how is he a great? 30 goals/per season is nothing amazing during his time; sorry. should we reward players for being healthy? b/c that is the only thing gartner needed to post 30 goals/season. i guess we should keep forsberg out b/c he was not 'consistently' healthy and didn't put up 30 goal/seasons for 736 straight seasons.

 

[silver_made*]

You were arguing for Bernie Nicholls to inducted into the Hockey Hall of Fame last week, and now you think Gartner should be removed.

both only have stats in their defense, unfortunately. nicholls had a better pt/game in BOTH regular and postseason play. maybe the most important of all was the following:

*the 'dawn' of the trap era (signified by devils cup over favored, high-flying red wings)...

'94-'95
Nicholls 48gms 22g 29a = 51pts
Gartner 38gms 12g 8a = 20pts.

'95-'96
Nicholls 59gms 19g 41a = 60pts
Gartner 82gms 35g 19a = 54pts

as both aged and hockey got tighter, nicholls was STILL very productive in the offensive end (very underrated talent). nicholls was still better than a pt/gm player when the sport turned to trapping (incredibly impressive, especially at age 35), and the same could not be said for HHOFer gartner.

 

[CoupeStanley]

Personally, it's all about how you'll be remembered. In 20 years, is there any reason to talk about this hockey player. Did the guy acheive a level of play worth remembering? In Gartner case, I'm not too sure that in 20 years we will talk about how he marked the game forever with his play. But there's a good reason why he'll be remembered, everytime you gonna look at a top-10 goal scorer list you'll see his name popup. There's no way around it, the guy scored 7-0-8 goals, thats a crazy number.

 

[silver_made*]

Personally, it's all about how you'll be remembered. In 20 years, is there any reason to talk about this hockey player. Did the guy acheive a level of play worth remembering? In Gartner case, I'm not too sure that in 20 years we will talk about how he marked the game forever with his play. But there's a good reason why he'll be remembered, everytime you gonna look at a top-10 goal scorer list you'll see his name popup. There's no way around it, the guy scored 7-0-8 goals, thats a crazy number.

between jagr, yzerman, lemieux, messier, sakic, and robitaille, mike will soon not even have being a top-10 scorer all-time to his credit

 

[Bring Back Bucky]

both only have stats in their defense, unfortunately. nicholls had a better pt/game in BOTH regular and postseason play. maybe the most important of all was the following:

*the 'dawn' of the trap era (signified by devils cup over favored, high-flying red wings)...

'94-'95
Nicholls 48gms 22g 29a = 51pts
Gartner 38gms 12g 8a = 20pts.

'95-'96
Nicholls 59gms 19g 41a = 60pts
Gartner 82gms 35g 19a = 54pts

as both aged and hockey got tighter, nicholls was STILL very productive in the offensive end (very underrated talent). nicholls was still better than a pt/gm player when the sport turned to trapping (incredibly impressive, especially at age 35), and the same could not be said for HHOFer gartner.

You're choosing TWO years that work in your favor to try and make a point. Aside from the lockout year, Gartner scored 30 goals in every year but his last. That's seventeen times to Nicholls seven. That's an astronomical difference. And so you'll know, Nicholls didn't come along until scoring was at its peak. Trying to compare these two careers is outright silly. I am not a Mike Gartner fan or an enemy to Broadway Bernie, but Gartner had an exponentially greater career than Nicholls.

 

[Higgy4]

And like I said before, those 708 goals are the only reason he's in.

I agree. But its a damn good reason.

 

[God Bless Canada]

The reason that Gartner's in the Hall is he did something nobody else has ever done. 17 30-goal seasons. Gretzky didn't do it. Kurri didn't do it. Hull won't do it. But Gartner did. You can argue era, irrelevance of a stat, etc, all you want, but it truly is a remarkable feat. Not only that, but the first 15 seasons were consecutive. Is anyone within five 30 goal seasons of Gartner? If there were a bunch of guys with 15 30-goal seasons, that would diminish the significance of his accomplishment. But there aren't. The 17 30-goal seasons is a record that will be incredibly hard to break, one that will require consistency, talent, durability and good health. The fact that Ciccerelli keeps getting turned down with 600 goals proves that 700 is the dividing line. Gartner did that, and he gets to go to the Hall.

And guess what? Gartner was a first-ballot Hall-of-Famer. While not as significant as baseball, where some of the voters are downright anal, it is significant. It's not like he was rejected several times like Federko or Gillies. Heck, he was elected AHEAD of Pat LaFontaine (who got in two years later) and Bernie Nicholls.

PS: To the poste rwho mentioned the team's record when trading Gartner, remember, teams that traded Coffey had a similar success rate. Why don't you mention who those teams traded Gartner for, and the contributions they made? It would kill your arguement? Yeah, that's what I thought. Or why didn't you mention the record of the Caps (who lost in the first round in 1989 after dealing him, although they would have lost with or without Gartner), Leafs and Coyotes immediately after they dealt Gartner? The real reason the Caps lost those years was a variety of factors, chief among them Bryan Murray's total inability to succeed in the post-season

 

[Higgy4]

There's no way around it, the guy scored 7-0-8 goals, thats a crazy number.

 

[Higgy4]

i never said removed, but why so unanimous? all he has on his side is #'s, and when you weigh factors like # of 50 goal seasons (1), # of 100 pt. seasons (1) over his career (played almost entirely during 12-7 hockey games), how is he a great? 30 goals/per season is nothing amazing during his time; sorry. should we reward players for being healthy? b/c that is the only thing gartner needed to post 30 goals/season. i guess we should keep forsberg out b/c he was not 'consistently' healthy and didn't put up 30 goal/seasons for 736 straight seasons.

6 guys have over 700 goals.

6!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Higgy4]

between jagr, yzerman, lemieux, messier, sakic, and robitaille, mike will soon not even have being a top-10 scorer all-time to his credit

Ok, so he is top 15 then. That means his name is among the likes of Gretzky, Howe, Hull, Messier, Yzerman, Lemieux, Dionne, Sakic, Jagr, Esposito...etc. Thats pretty exclusive territory.

If only 12 or so guys end up with 700+ goals, then I think its VERY exclusive.

Gartner is in...and rightfully so.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

The reason that Gartner's in the Hall is he did something nobody else has ever done. 17 30-goal seasons. Gretzky didn't do it. Kurri didn't do it. Hull won't do it. But Gartner did. You can argue era, irrelevance of a stat, etc, all you want, but it truly is a remarkable feat. Not only that, but the first 15 seasons were consecutive. Is anyone within five 30 goal seasons of Gartner? If there were a bunch of guys with 15 30-goal seasons, that would diminish the significance of his accomplishment. But there aren't. The 17 30-goal seasons is a record that will be incredibly hard to break, one that will require consistency, talent, durability and good health. The fact that Ciccerelli keeps getting turned down with 600 goals proves that 700 is the dividing line. Gartner did that, and he gets to go to the Hall.

Most 30 goal seasons, unadjusted:

Mike Gartner 17
Gordie Howe 14
Marcel Dionne 14
Wayne Gretzky 14
Bobby Hull 13
Brett Hull 13
Jaromir Jagr 13
Phil Esposito 13
Luc Robitaille 12
Brendan Shanahan 11
Bryan Trottier 11
Dino Ciccarelli 11
Jari Kurri 11
Mario Lemieux 11
Mark Messier 11
Mats Sundin 11
Steve Yzerman 11

Most 30 goal seasons, adjusted for era:

Gordie Howe 19
Brett Hull 15
Mike Gartner 14
Bobby Hull 13
Brendan Shanahan 13
Luc Robitaille 13
Mats Sundin 13
Wayne Gretzky 13
Jaromir Jagr 12
Joe Nieuwendyk 12
Joe Sakic 12
Marcel Dionne 12
Mario Lemieux 12
Maurice Richard 12
Phil Esposito 12

Gartner's in very exclusive company either way you look at it.

 

[John Flyers Fan]

PS: To the poste rwho mentioned the team's record when trading Gartner, remember, teams that traded Coffey had a similar success rate. Why don't you mention who those teams traded Gartner for, and the contributions they made? It would kill your arguement? Yeah, that's what I thought. Or why didn't you mention the record of the Caps (who lost in the first round in 1989 after dealing him, although they would have lost with or without Gartner), Leafs and Coyotes immediately after they dealt Gartner? The real reason the Caps lost those years was a variety of factors, chief among them Bryan Murray's total inability to succeed in the post-season

Coffey won 4 Stanley Cups. Gartner never sniffed a Cup Finals. End of story.

Minnesota got Ulf Dahlen for Gartner, he was a minor contributor to the North Stars Success in making it to the Finals.

The Rangers got Glen Anderson for Gartner. He had a whopping 6 points in 23 rangers playoff games. Not exactly a key cog.

The Capitals got Dino Cicarelli for Gartner. He put up 35 points in 32 playoff games as a Cap.

 

[Roughneck]

Would a guy be rejected from the baseball HOF (the hardest hall to get into) if he had 700 home runs? Even if his playoff games weren't memorable, never won a world series and never had a monster year. Just 700+ home runs. He'd be in on the first ballot without hesitation.

Yes, the 700 home run club is a bit more exclusive than the 700 goal club. By 3 members.

You shouldn't need to look at anything else. How you can't call it dominant is beyond me. If it weren't exceptional, there would be more than 5 other players to have done it.

 

[Hasbro]

Would a guy be rejected from the baseball HOF (the hardest hall to get into) if he had 700 home runs? Even if his playoff games weren't memorable, never won a world series and never had a monster year. Just 700+ home runs. He'd be in on the first ballot without hesitation.

Yes, the 700 home run club is a bit more exclusive than the 700 goal club. By 3 members.

You shouldn't need to look at anything else. How you can't call it dominant is beyond me. If it weren't exceptional, there would be more than 5 other players to have done it.

I don't think Hank Aaron broke 50. He piled on tons of 30 Hr seasons.

 

[silver_made*]

I don't think Hank Aaron broke 50. He piled on tons of 30 Hr seasons.

when pitching was still quality, which made his accomplishments significant. the goaltending gartner faced? .....

 

[Higgy4]

I don't think Hank Aaron broke 50. He piled on tons of 30 Hr seasons.

Yep. Hammerin Hank's career high was 47 HR's.

 

[Higgy4]

when pitching was still quality, which made his accomplishments significant. the goaltending gartner faced? .....

Wow, did Gartner sleep with your wife or something? You are simply grasping at straws now.

 

[Mothra]

Gartner was average and apparently the Hall recognizes mediocrity. 1 season of 100+ points during the RHI era of the NHL? Give me a break. His goal totals are the result of "consistency" over playing for an eternity. So, I say we nominate Joe Cirella for the Hall next!

Gartner was much more than "average"....why dont you give us the break....didnt you say you never saw Nicholls play? If so....you never saw Gartner when he was at his best, and certainly not Dionne or most of the other guys you mentioned

I dont know what it is you are trying to do.....rate guys you never saw? and then act like a knucklehead when people who actually did see him tell you why he should be in the HOF by saying things like "give me a break"......

By not actually seeing Gartner play and then saying all he was, was an average player you didnt see that he played (when with the Capitals) on a defensive first team....those teams were always built on D and played that way. Often at or near the top in goals allowed. I'm not saying Gartner was some amazing all world talent that was shoehorned into a defensive minded team.....but they did play a very conservative brand of hockey, that served them well. But seeing how this is all missed by you, you call him mediocre.....maybe you should just offer up opinions on players you actually know something about and have seen play

 

[EventHorizon]

Here's the criteria for making the hall; this comes from the HHOF website:

Playing ability, sportsmanship, character and their contribution to the team or teams and to the game of hockey in general.

A few people have mentioned the sportsmanship and character, and I just want to reiterate it. I would rather have him in the hall than a lot of other unsavory characters.

But obviously, the most important criteria is the playing ability, and he had it without question. I mean 17 30 goal seasons. 708 goals total. That's insane. You can't point to his playoff failures, the teams he played on just weren't that good. Not one of his Caps or North Stars teams ever won the division. His fault? I doubt it, he was busy with his string of 30 goal seasons. The teams just weren't that good. The first division winner he played on was the New York Rangers in 1990, the year he got traded to them. And they were by no means a great team, they only finished 5 games above .500. But then comes 1992. He's finally on a Presidents' Trophy winning Stanley Cup contending team. But they choked in the playoffs, you might call this his only playoff failure. Again in '94 he plays on 2 great teams, getting far into the playoffs that year but falling short. He never played on a team that good again. What's my point in all this? There were really only 2 years out of his 19 seasons where he played on a team that you could say had a legitimate shot at the Cup. And unfortunately he fell short. Only 2 great teams yet he was still able to put up 17 30 goal seasons and finish with 708 goals. That's why he is deservedly in the Hall of Fame.

 

[MS]

As others have already stated, when you score 708 times in the best hockey league in the world, you go to the Hall of Fame. End of story.