The Hall of Very Good

[Al Bundy*]

This is a term I have seen thrown around in some threads on History of Hockey.

Who would you say are the guys at the top of the list for 'They are not good enough for the HHOF, more like the Hall of Very Good'

Click to read more...

 

[begbeee]

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=1142301

 

[McGuillicuddy]

The term "Hall of Very Good" doesn't make any sense to me since "Very Good" is not a lesser degree of "Fame". If it was the "Hall of Great" then we could use the term "Hall of Very Good" as a corresponding but lesser group. A better term would be "Hall of Notable"

 

[unknown33]

Joe Nieuwendyk and Dino Ciccarelli

 

[kmad]

Chris Osgood, Dave Andreychuk, Mike Gartner

 

[Leaf Lander]

Jagr had a 10 cent head n a bad haircut

 

[Mothra]

Joe Nieuwendyk and Dino Ciccarelli

I have no issue at all with either of these guys......too many people want guys that were the absolute best and a Hall of Fame with about 50 players (instead of the 250 or so that are in)

I watched both of these guys and would love to have them as key pieces on a team. Although Dino didnt win a Cup he was a great playoff player....Nieuwendyk wins a couple Cups...a Conn Smythe...as well as all sorts of other achievments. If he isnt a HoFer I dont know who is short of 4/99/66

people need to get over this "Hall of Very Good".....its "Fame" not "Hall of the best guy at his position"....but people need something to complain about, why not complain about guys they know nothing about

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

I have no issue at all with either of these guys......too many people want guys that were the absolute best and a Hall of Fame with about 50 players (instead of the 250 or so that are in)

I watched both of these guys and would love to have them as key pieces on a team. Although Dino didnt win a Cup he was a great playoff player....Nieuwendyk wins a couple Cups...a Conn Smythe...as well as all sorts of other achievments. If he isnt a HoFer I dont know who is short of 4/99/66

people need to get over this "Hall of Very Good".....its "Fame" not "Hall of the best guy at his position"....but people need something to complain about, why not complain about guys they know nothing about

i think most people's problems with those guys, as well as neely, federko, gillies, gartner, and others, is that there is not a lot, if anything, that distinguishes them from players that haven't/won't make the hall. so then the selection process becomes arbitrary or a popularity contest.

for example, why dino and not andreychuk? why neely and not lindros, bure, kerr, leclair? federko and not turgeon? there are arguments, and some are reasonable, to justify all of those borderline hall of famers. but there are also just as many if not more reasonable arguments that say guys who haven't gotten in (lindros, bure, oates, makarov) belong in there more than the bottom rung guys that did get in.

this is why "small hall" proponents generally like the goalie selections. by many calculations, vachon and barrasso should be hall of famers. but there is a cut-off of 1. two or more vezinas + at least one cup, or four or more cups + at least vezina (to drastically simplify what separates roy/hasek/brodeur/belfour from the leaders of the next pack). so denying barrasso, though reasonable arguments can be made that he belongs, prevents us from getting into a situation where we ask, "if barrasso, why not joseph?" and then later, "if joseph, why not kolzig?"