Should Ilya Kovalchuk be inducted to the HHOF?

vadim sharifijanov

Registered User
Oct 10, 2007
28,584
15,948
Almost every high pick in NHL history has joined a bad team as that's who gets the high picks. For example, Dale Hawerchuk joined an abysmal Jets team as the #1 overall. They basically had zero chance of advancing beyond a playoff round with Calgary and Edmonton in their division for the entire 80's. Hawerchuk has been often criticized for his lack of playoff success. Despite this, Hawerchuk ended up playing over twice the amount of playoff games as did Kariya. Making the playoffs and winning Cups is the name of the game. It is up to the great players to get them there. Kovalchuk and Kariya didn't get the job done.

we can argue all day long about whether kariya and dionne being saddled with one line teams, whereas hawerchuk generally had much weaker linemates but better support on the second line with dave christian as his 2C, then thomas steen. but it should be noted that hawerchuk never ever had a goalie like hebert, to say nothing of giguere.

still, before hfboards i had actually never ever heard anyone criticize hawerchuk for his lack of playoff success. i mean, as an 18 year old joining a last overall team hawerchuk led the team to a home ice playoff spot, then scored eight points in a four-game first round loss, with four points in his team's single win (5-2), against a blues team that had the previous year's vezina winner and a top line that combined for a ridiculous 11 goals and 32 points in the series. jets goalies doug soetaert and ed staniowski combined for a luongo-esque 14 goals against in the last two games.

hawerchuk retired with a higher than point/game scoring rate in the playoffs, finishing with a career total of one single point under 100. his scoring rate in his peak, when he made the playoffs every year from his rookie year to 1988, is 6th among players over that period. his scoring rate in winnipeg, so adding the 1990 playoffs, is 5th over the period. over his prime, the twelve years from his rookie year up to '94, is 7th. his entire career is 28th all time, among all players, ever. obviously, those per games look a little better than they should because he rarely played deep into the playoffs, when points are harder to come by (with the exception of his old man runs in philadelphia, which actually skew his career per game down because they make up almost 1/3 of his total playoff games), but still those are not the numbers of a bad playoff performer. certainly not a guy who belongs in any conversation with dionne or kariya.

now back to kovalchuk, he had hawerchuk's problems. didn't have the greatest linemates (but he was an individualist so he arguably did not need them), but in his best years had at least one star-level player on another scoring line to help him. it was, though, obviously harder to make the playoffs on this kind of team in the 2000s than in the 80s, especially when kovalchuk's goalies were usually garbage, save for the new jersey years obviously.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Killion

The Panther

Registered User
Mar 25, 2014
19,110
15,573
Tokyo, Japan
Making the playoffs and winning Cups is the name of the game. It is up to the great players to get them there. Kovalchuk and Kariya didn't get the job done.
Yeah, you might be forgetting that Kariya played in the 7th game of the Stanley Cup Finals...? It's much, much further than Hawerchuk or Kovalchuk got.
 

Sturminator

Love is a duel
Feb 27, 2002
9,894
1,070
West Egg, New York
Making the playoffs and winning Cups is the name of the game. It is up to the great players to get them there. Kovalchuk and Kariya didn't get the job done.
This is a highly reductive view of what should qualify a player for the HHOF. Players don't control the teams on which they play. Lots of great players have made the Hall without extensive playoff resumes.
 

The Pale King

Go easy on those Mango Giapanes brother...
Sep 24, 2011
3,110
2,489
Zeballos
Yeah, you might be forgetting that Kariya played in the 7th game of the Stanley Cup Finals...? It's much, much further than Hawerchuk or Kovalchuk got.

I don't want to defend Kovalchuk, but he did get to game six with the Devils against a Kings team that steamrolled everyone else they saw in 5 games or less.

Kariya was the team's fourth or fifth best player in the '03 run. It wasn't like he was leading the charge at that point.
 

The Panther

Registered User
Mar 25, 2014
19,110
15,573
Tokyo, Japan
Kariya was the team's fourth or fifth best player in the '03 run. It wasn't like he was leading the charge at that point.
Again, he was one point off leading the team in scoring, while acting as captain of a team in game 7 of the Finals (while getting cold-cocked by a late hit that would be a 20-game suspension today). What more do you want the guy to do? I suppose you would be more impressed if he'd scored a bunch of points but his team had been eliminated earlier.

This narrative gets silly at some point. Hawerchuk is a great playoff performer because of higher scoring stats while rarely getting past the first round (it wasn't his fault), while Kariya is terrible because he was just below a point per game in the Dead Puck era and his team was one win short of a Stanley Cup.

I mean, really, people.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GreatGonzo

GreatGonzo

Surrounded by Snowflakes
May 26, 2011
8,860
2,902
South Of the Tank
You don’t need to be a great player to win a cup. People talk like the cup engravings are sectioned off I’m terms of value, or who played the most minutes, or who was on the top line. Sure, you can clearly tell who was and wasn’t a valuable member of a cup....br a cup is a cup. Justin Williams has 3, just like Crosby, but you wouldn’t say they were anywhere near the same caliber of player, but that doesn’t matter. Both have the same amount of cups, and by the logic of many of you, that puts Williams near a higher level.

A cup is a cup. You get your names engraved on it and your day with it. In the end it’s a team effort, it doesn’t matter how amazing of a player you are, hell....it doesn’t matter if you were the playoff MVP. You still need a solid team around you to win it all.
 

The Pale King

Go easy on those Mango Giapanes brother...
Sep 24, 2011
3,110
2,489
Zeballos
Again, he was one point off leading the team in scoring, while acting as captain of a team in game 7 of the Finals (while getting cold-cocked by a late hit that would be a 20-game suspension today). What more do you want the guy to do? I suppose you would be more impressed if he'd scored a bunch of points but his team had been eliminated earlier.

This narrative gets silly at some point. Hawerchuk is a great playoff performer because of higher scoring stats while rarely getting past the first round (it wasn't his fault), while Kariya is terrible because he was just below a point per game in the Dead Puck era and his team was one win short of a Stanley Cup.

I mean, really, people.

I was just commenting on the fact that Kovalchuk played in a game six of the SCF. You said Kariya made it "much, much farther" than him. That's wrong.

He only scored 12 points in that run. Yes, that's only one off the team lead, as you said, but it's also only one more than Mike Leclerc. That team was as offensively challenged as any Stanley Cup Finalist, and I think a lot of people wanted a bit more from Kariya on that run.

I take Kariya over Kovalchuk though, I was just chiming in about him not playing in the SCFs. Had nothing to do with Hawerchuk, not sure where you're pulling that from.
 

frisco

Some people claim that there's a woman to blame...
Sep 14, 2017
3,553
2,643
Northern Hemisphere
Again, he was one point off leading the team in scoring, while acting as captain of a team in game 7 of the Finals (while getting cold-cocked by a late hit that would be a 20-game suspension today). What more do you want the guy to do? I suppose you would be more impressed if he'd scored a bunch of points but his team had been eliminated earlier.
Getting hit by Stevens doesn't make Kariya a great playoff performer. He made the playoffs six times in 15 seasons. Made it past the first round twice. Kovalchuk's record is slightly worse. Neither really deserves to be in the Hall.

My Best-Carey
 

thedoughboy

Registered User
Feb 22, 2015
1,594
5
Tinyest of the fifty
They're separate statements.
It's a not a matter of whether it's his fault. It's a question about what his numbers would have looked like if he were playing to win or if his team were playing to win instead of padding his stats.

He has a lot more Top-10's than Iginla. In 2002, Iginla's bad team gave him the 'Kovalchuk treatment' for the last 30 games of the season because they had nothing else to play for and he won an Art Ross. He never did again and rarely challenged for it either, because he was playing to win. How much would Kovalchuk's numbers have decline if he'd played on good teams?

I'm quite interested on how you're actually meaning that sentence, cause it comes off like your not quite getting the point across.

When you have a very good offensive player and you want to win games, you play him to score more goals. If you're an offensive player, you try to score goals and win games. Its not "padding his stats" if the teams best interest and his best interest is for him to score more and I don't understand how you're drawing that conclusion.

Also saying Iggy was givin the "kovaalchuk treatment" is a bit rich considering he scored only 2 more points in the second half of the season than he did the first. He didn't win the scoring trophy because he was given the "kovalchuk treatement" he won the scoring race because he had a career year. Not because of some mystical differing deployment that he got because they were out of the playoff race already. If that was the case, why didn't it happen the following year? or the previous year? or any other year once they they realized they were out of playoff contention?
 

Jim MacDonald

Registered User
Oct 7, 2017
703
180
I look at the body of work and see a good player, but not HOF worthy, no seasons over 100 points, the -116 is a bit of an eyesore.....he's hurt by the fact a lot of years were in Atlanta, & just not long enough of a playoff resume. I can't speak for international/KHL statistics etc. but this body of work is a little bit short for a Hall of Fame induction to me.
 

Zuluss

Registered User
May 19, 2011
2,436
2,027
Kovalchuk VsX for the best 7 years has him in between Luc Robitaille and Syd Howe, both Hall of Famers. I could not find anyone who would be both eligible and higher than Kovalchuk on VsX, but not in HOF yet, which implies that, should he be kept out, he will become the guy with the best prime among non-HOFers. And that's not to mention the fact that his goal-scoring was awesome and on par with not only Iginla's, but actually Lafleur's / Dionne's / Yzerman's goal-scoring.

I think Lucky Luc is a particularly good comparison

Kovalchuk's points finishes
2, 5, 6, 8, 10
Robitaille's points finishes
5, 5, 9, 10

Kovalchuk's goals finishes
1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 6, 7, 8
Robitaille's goals finishes
4, 4, 6, 7, 7, 9, 9, 10, 10

Given that Robitaille played on the line with Gretzky and Kovalchuk's Thrashers were mostly a one-man team, I am not sure how Robitaille is in, and Kovalchuk will be out.

As for the international resume, Kovalchuk's international resume is the same as Jagr's.
Kovalchuk 49g+54a in 117gp
Jagr 47g+55a in 121 gp
Jagr's international play was never brought out as a trump card, but I never heard someone say it is a weakness on his resume. Which should probably suggest that for Kovalchuk as a smaller player an international resume comparable to Jagr's is a good thing.
 

The Panther

Registered User
Mar 25, 2014
19,110
15,573
Tokyo, Japan
I agree with Zuluss, but just to nitpick that Robitaille did not play on Gretzky's line, and also he had three 1st/2nd-team All Star selections when Gretzky wasn't even his teammate, including a 55-goal sophomore season.

But in any case, yes. I'm sensing some sort of illogical bias by people against Kovalchuk. Is this because he bolted from the NHL?
 

trentmccleary

Registered User
Mar 2, 2002
22,226
1,100
Alfie-Ville
Visit site
When you have a very good offensive player and you want to win games, you play him to score more goals. If you're an offensive player, you try to score goals and win games. Its not "padding his stats" if the teams best interest and his best interest is for him to score more and I don't understand how you're drawing that conclusion.

There were lots of good offensive players in the NHL and quite a few were on bad teams at times too. Few(none?) were played the way that Kovalchuk was in Atlanta. Long shifts, full powerplays, not expected to contribute defensively, etc. It's like they were trying to pad his stats to create a star to sell the game. The only problem was all the losing, which is why every other team got away from playing all but the most exceptional players like that before the Thrashers ever had a team.

Also saying Iggy was givin the "kovaalchuk treatment" is a bit rich considering he scored only 2 more points in the second half of the season than he did the first. He didn't win the scoring trophy because he was given the "kovalchuk treatement" he won the scoring race because he had a career year. Not because of some mystical differing deployment that he got because they were out of the playoff race already. If that was the case, why didn't it happen the following year? or the previous year? or any other year once they they realized they were out of playoff contention?

First 53gp vs. last 29gp:
53-32-26-58, 0.55 GPG, 1.09 PPG, 21:30 TOI, 3.43 sh/gp (Flames on 81 pts/82 pace)... 14x 5+ shot games/53gp
29-20-18-38, 0.69 GPG, 1.31 PPG, 24:00 TOI, 4.45 sh/gp (Flames on 71 pts/82 pace)... 18x 5+ shot games/29gp

The Flames gave up when they knew they were out and focused on winning Iginla the Art Ross.

But in any case, yes. I'm sensing some sort of illogical bias by people against Kovalchuk. Is this because he bolted from the NHL?

No, it's because it's hard to compare his career with his contemporaries. He had zero intangible value, no defensive responsibilities, 50% more PP time than anybody else and might have the highest loss percentage of any star player in NHL history.

Kovalchuk VsX for the best 7 years has him in between Luc Robitaille and Syd Howe, both Hall of Famers. I could not find anyone who would be both eligible and higher than Kovalchuk on VsX, but not in HOF yet, which implies that, should he be kept out, he will become the guy with the best prime among non-HOFers. And that's not to mention the fact that his goal-scoring was awesome and on par with not only Iginla's, but actually Lafleur's / Dionne's / Yzerman's goal-scoring.

I think Lucky Luc is a particularly good comparison

Kovalchuk's points finishes
2, 5, 6, 8, 10
Robitaille's points finishes
5, 5, 9, 10

Kovalchuk's goals finishes
1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 6, 7, 8
Robitaille's goals finishes
4, 4, 6, 7, 7, 9, 9, 10, 10

Given that Robitaille played on the line with Gretzky and Kovalchuk's Thrashers were mostly a one-man team, I am not sure how Robitaille is in, and Kovalchuk will be out.

As for the international resume, Kovalchuk's international resume is the same as Jagr's.
Kovalchuk 49g+54a in 117gp
Jagr 47g+55a in 121 gp
Jagr's international play was never brought out as a trump card, but I never heard someone say it is a weakness on his resume. Which should probably suggest that for Kovalchuk as a smaller player an international resume comparable to Jagr's is a good thing.

This is a snapshot of Kovalchuk and his immediate contemporaries (1999-2003 draftees) at the conclusion on Kovalchuk's last season (2013):

PlayerPPG@2013PPTOI
Spezza1.024:01pp18:41toi
Kovalchuk1.005:42PP21:58toi
Heatley0.974:19pp20:35toi
Zetterberg0.943:28pp19:34toi
Getzlaf0.943:41pp19:09toi
Staal0.914:23pp20:27toi
Gaborik0.913:39pp18:46toi
H.Sedin0.893:32pp17:28toi
D.Sedin0.873:26pp16:49toi
Nash0.823:45pp18:57toi
Perry0.813:20pp18:15toi
[TBODY] [/TBODY]

He needed 2 more mins of PP time and 3 1/2 mins more per game (with no PK time) to barely outscore these players. What would have happened if the shoe was on the other foot? What if the other players had been given 'Kovalchuk ice time'? What if Kovalchuk had been expected to play to win? How much would the gap have closed?

I don't know how anybody can easily reconcile this guy's career and say with certainty where he fits in the order of things.
 

Zuluss

Registered User
May 19, 2011
2,436
2,027
This is a snapshot of Kovalchuk and his immediate contemporaries (1999-2003 draftees) at the conclusion on Kovalchuk's last season (2013):

PlayerPPG@2013PPTOI
Spezza1.024:01pp18:41toi
Kovalchuk1.005:42PP21:58toi
Heatley0.974:19pp20:35toi
Zetterberg0.943:28pp19:34toi
Getzlaf0.943:41pp19:09toi
Staal0.914:23pp20:27toi
Gaborik0.913:39pp18:46toi
H.Sedin0.893:32pp17:28toi
D.Sedin0.873:26pp16:49toi
Nash0.823:45pp18:57toi
Perry0.813:20pp18:15toi
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
He needed 2 more mins of PP time and 3 1/2 mins more per game (with no PK time) to barely outscore these players. What would have happened if the shoe was on the other foot? What if the other players had been given 'Kovalchuk ice time'? What if Kovalchuk had been expected to play to win? How much would the gap have closed?

I don't know how anybody can easily reconcile this guy's career and say with certainty where he fits in the order of things.

OK, so now he needs to outscore everyone drafted in 5 years around his draft year to be in HOF? :)

It is not like if you make Sedins play 2 minutes more per game, they will score 10% more. Most likely, they will be gassed halfway into the third more often then not and totally spent around game 70 of every season. And Kovalchuk was not, which is the reason he played those minutes: he had the stamina to play them and still be effective. And it is not only about Atlanta: he had the highest TOI among forwards by a visible margin playing in New Jersey too, and in 11/12, in addition to playing 24.5 minutes per game, he was very decent defensively, played good SH minutes and still went above ppg and finished 6th in goals and 5th in points. Heck, he had by far the highest TOI of all forwards in playoffs the same year, despite missing a game and nursing a back injury, and Devils played in SCF. So Devils looked at Kovalchuk and figured the best way to use him, despite him being close to 30, is the same - have him play a lot of minutes. And it worked for them, they made a great Cup run that way.

The reason why Kovalchuk got so much PP time is also simple: he was a finisher. His job was to get open for a one-timer, not to dig out pucks. So he could be rather stationary, just like Ovechkin is on PP the past few years, but still he was effective.
 

Zuluss

Registered User
May 19, 2011
2,436
2,027
This is a snapshot of Kovalchuk and his immediate contemporaries (1999-2003 draftees) at the conclusion on Kovalchuk's last season (2013):

PlayerPPG@2013PPTOI
Spezza1.024:01pp18:41toi
Kovalchuk1.005:42PP21:58toi
Heatley0.974:19pp20:35toi
Zetterberg0.943:28pp19:34toi
Getzlaf0.943:41pp19:09toi
Staal0.914:23pp20:27toi
Gaborik0.913:39pp18:46toi
H.Sedin0.893:32pp17:28toi
D.Sedin0.873:26pp16:49toi
Nash0.823:45pp18:57toi
Perry0.813:20pp18:15toi
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
He needed 2 more mins of PP time and 3 1/2 mins more per game (with no PK time) to barely outscore these players. What would have happened if the shoe was on the other foot? What if the other players had been given 'Kovalchuk ice time'? What if Kovalchuk had been expected to play to win? How much would the gap have closed?

I don't know how anybody can easily reconcile this guy's career and say with certainty where he fits in the order of things.

And look, you listed 10 best forwards drafted 5 years around Kovalchuk's draft year. Maybe the talent level was weak these years, but still: who og them is going into HOF before Kovalchuk?
OK, Sedins, because of the peak. Who else?
Nash could never manage a top10 finish in points and he was not as a good a goal-scorer as Kovalchuk. Same for Gaborik. Healtey crashed and burned, and Perry seems to be following the same trajectory.
Staal and Spezza have meh peak (6th and 76th and 4th and 6th in points in non-consecutive years).
Who is left? Zetterberg (meh RS peak, but defense and playoffs) and Getzlaf (worse point finishes despite being a center and a passer, but, again, playoffs).
So Kovalchuk is, at worst, 5th-best in 5 years around his draft. We can induct one forward per year even from a weak period, can't we? Last time I checked, each year we are inducting four people.
 

The Pale King

Go easy on those Mango Giapanes brother...
Sep 24, 2011
3,110
2,489
Zeballos
Kovalchuk is a weird case. I think he gets in, and probably deserves to on talent. But he'd have the worst post-season resume of any HHOF'er post-expansion (unless I'm blanking on some weird corner-case). How much of that is his fault? N0t much. But I think it's fair to recognize he played in a system that let him maximize his point totals.

I would rather put Palffy in, personally, but I realize bias plays a big part in that. He still ended up putting up better per game numbers than Kovalchuk, mostly through the DPE, and I know at least in LA he wasn't playing full power-plays and what not. Wouldn't surprise me if he was with the Islanders though, those teams were comparable to some of the Atlanta rosters in terms of talent.

Both guys barely played in the post-season, kind of a waste. 19 points in 24 games for Palffy and 27 in 32 for Kovalchuk.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheDevilMadeMe

Zuluss

Registered User
May 19, 2011
2,436
2,027
Kovalchuk is a weird case. I think he gets in, and probably deserves to on talent. But he'd have the worst post-season resume of any HHOF'er post-expansion (unless I'm blanking on some weird corner-case).

Stamkos has 35 points in 49 games so far. I'd say Kovalchuk's 27 in 32 are better.
I think Kovalchuk's extensive international resume makes us for the lack of his playoff record. I'd put a single-elimination game against, say, team Sweden in WHC higher than pretty much any playoff game in the first two rounds.
 

trentmccleary

Registered User
Mar 2, 2002
22,226
1,100
Alfie-Ville
Visit site
OK, so now he needs to outscore everyone drafted in 5 years around his draft year to be in HOF? :)

Those are his cohort (the players from his generation). He is competing directly with them to be inducted into the HHOF, moreso than Dave Andreychuk, Hayley Wickenheiser or Scooter McGee from 1923.

It is not like if you make Sedins play 2 minutes more per game, they will score 10% more. Most likely, they will be gassed halfway into the third more often then not and totally spent around game 70 of every season. And Kovalchuk was not, which is the reason he played those minutes: he had the stamina to play them and still be effective. And it is not only about Atlanta: he had the highest TOI among forwards by a visible margin playing in New Jersey too, and in 11/12, in addition to playing 24.5 minutes per game, he was very decent defensively, played good SH minutes and still went above ppg and finished 6th in goals and 5th in points. Heck, he had by far the highest TOI of all forwards in playoffs the same year, despite missing a game and nursing a back injury, and Devils played in SCF. So Devils looked at Kovalchuk and figured the best way to use him, despite him being close to 30, is the same - have him play a lot of minutes. And it worked for them, they made a great Cup run that way.

The Sedins would be gassed... and what would be the negative consequence of that? Being -117 in your career?

How can we seriously discuss the idea that Kovalchuk was used effectively when his team's accomplished nothing year after year?

The reason why Kovalchuk got so much PP time is also simple: he was a finisher. His job was to get open for a one-timer, not to dig out pucks. So he could be rather stationary, just like Ovechkin is on PP the past few years, but still he was effective.

He produced less than some players who were getting half as much PP time playing on winning teams. He was a bad team scorer at the extreme for basically the whole of his career. He wouldn't have been played like that on legitimate teams.

And look, you listed 10 best forwards drafted 5 years around Kovalchuk's draft year. Maybe the talent level was weak these years, but still: who og them is going into HOF before Kovalchuk?
OK, Sedins, because of the peak. Who else?
Nash could never manage a top10 finish in points and he was not as a good a goal-scorer as Kovalchuk. Same for Gaborik. Healtey crashed and burned, and Perry seems to be following the same trajectory.
Staal and Spezza have meh peak (6th and 76th and 4th and 6th in points in non-consecutive years).
Who is left? Zetterberg (meh RS peak, but defense and playoffs) and Getzlaf (worse point finishes despite being a center and a passer, but, again, playoffs).
So Kovalchuk is, at worst, 5th-best in 5 years around his draft. We can induct one forward per year even from a weak period, can't we? Last time I checked, each year we are inducting four people.

For best player/best career?
The Sedin's, Zetterberg, Getzlaf and Bergeron.
Then I'd probably Kovalchuk fighting it out with Eric Staal after them.
 

Zuluss

Registered User
May 19, 2011
2,436
2,027
The Sedins would be gassed... and what would be the negative consequence of that?

They would have ppg much closer to their current one than Kovalchuk's.

How can we seriously discuss the idea that Kovalchuk was used effectively when his team's accomplished nothing year after year?

New Jersey 11/12 accomplished nothing? I thought they played in SCF. And they used Kovalchuk the same way in RS and PO (24.5 minutes per game TOI, huge PP minutes).


He wouldn't have been played like that on legitimate teams.

So a team winning the East is not legitimate. Have we seen a legitimate team since Gretzky's Oilers then?

For best player/best career?
The Sedin's, Zetterberg, Getzlaf and Bergeron.
Then I'd probably Kovalchuk fighting it out with Eric Staal after them.

Fine, so five forwards from a five-year cohort go in before Kovalchuk. On average, a five-year cohort gets 20 players in (4 inductees per year). I guess that means Kovalchuk is in unless we find a whole dozen of goalies/defensemen from the five-year cohort that are better than him.[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->