Gardner McKay
RIP, Jimmy.
You're joking? Especially to Mike Gartner???? 708 goals isn't HHOF worthy? Same with Andreychuk at his 640 goals. How are they not HHOF worthy?
The Hockey Hall of Fame Adds Too Many Members Each Year
- Thread starter IceyDice
- Start date
You're joking? Especially to Mike Gartner???? 708 goals isn't HHOF worthy? Same with Andreychuk at his 640 goals. How are they not HHOF worthy?
FerrisRox
"Wanna go, Prettyboy?"
The minute the Hockey Hall of Fame signed a deal with TSN to be the exclusive broadcast partner they put themselves in a position where every year, regardless of what players are eligible, they need to have an induction and it needs to at least have some name cache so their is something to televise. This means you can't go back on soft years and induct someone from the 40's or 50's that perhaps was overlooked because that doesn't translate to a live broadcast (there's no player to give a speech and no name that is familiar to fans to make them tune in.) Turning it into a broadcast event compromised the integrity of the entire process.
Who shouldn't they have picked from 2010 onwards? You could probably find 3 or 4 who could be left out (maybe Cicarelli, Vachon, Recchi?). That's not a lot, and I have no problem with these anyway.
Compilers.
Neither were great, they just played for a long time.
Name me one season when you think they were even one of the top 10 player in the league.
Last edited:
Gardner McKay
RIP, Jimmy.
So that goes against them? I hear the argument that Mike Bossy isn't one of the greatest goal scorers of all time due to his shortened career.
By the same token, you also have Lindros listed and there were definitely a few seasons where he was a top-10 player. If not for being derailed by injuries, Lindros easily could have been one of the top players of all time. Your argument kind of collapses on itself there.
It's just there was nothing great about their careers. They were never near being one of the top players in the game. They just played a long time, and compiled a bunch of points due to their longevity.
I don't believe career longevity is a good reason to put 'good' players next to the all-time greats of the game.
BTW Bossy played his entire peak. He retired at 30. He left his impact on the game.
Bolded that for you.
It's why I think he's borderline.
Last edited:
BobColesNasalCavity
Registered User
No way Dave Andreychuk should be in.
5 seasons of 80+ points. Never more than 99 points.
Didn't score more than 30 goals after 1993/94.
And he played for 23 seasons. Definition of mediocrity. The guy known as the Garbage Man in the prestigious Hall of Fame is an oxymoron.
But I guess he scored 53 one season for the Leafs so that probably put him in...
Top 3 in career power play goals
Top 10 all time in games played
Top 15 all time in career goals, Ovie just passed him this year.
Top 30 all time in career points. Will be out of the top 30 when Crosby and Ovie retire most likely.
1 Stanley Cup Ring
If that ain’t hall of fame, I don’t know what is. Sure he wasn’t dominating seasons by a landslide or making highlight reals on a game by game basis. He is in for his consistency and career longevity which in itself is very hard to do in the NHL level.
FerrisRox
"Wanna go, Prettyboy?"
You use "could have been" to describe the player and then claim the posters argument collapses on itself?
That's hilarious.
Last edited:
FerrisRox
"Wanna go, Prettyboy?"
Surely you can see how much of Andreychuk's "success" can be attributed to longevity rather than excellence?
Over fifty percent of the players that make it to the NHL have careers that last less than one hundred games. Only five percent of the players that make it to the NHL play over 1000 games. You seem *really* impressed by Andreychuk's longevity, but that has absolutely nothing to do with what the Hockey Hall of Fame represents.
Just because a guy plays a long career, that doesn't make him one of the all time greats. Andreychuk was able to compile some impressive numbers by being a mediocre player for fifteen years, being a solid NHL winger for five more years and being a top flight producer for three years. Pretending all of that adds up to being an All-Timer is a very strange conclusion to arrive at and seems to reek of simply looking at the totals he compiled rather than looking at him as a player.
The Hall of Fame should be reserved for the best of the best. Dave Andreychuk was never even remotely in that conversation at any point of his career, it's silly to even suggest.
Last edited:
These are why I don't think he should have been in.
I don't think longevity, and consistency should be rewarded for Hall of Fame entries.
He just wasn't ever a great player at any point in his career.
It's why he's unanimously considered one of the worst forwards inducted into the HHOF.
Let me ask you Andreychuk supporters a hypothetical question:
Do you think a player like Jakub Voracek deserves to be inducted into the HHOF if he stays in the league another 13 years, averaging 40 points a season, and ends up having over 1200 points?
Because that's what you're telling me. A 'decent', but not amazing player like Voracek, should be in the HHOF for putting up a long string of "ok" seasons.
(Voracek was once 5th in league scoring which is WAY higher than Andreychuk ever got).
Last edited:
Gardner McKay
RIP, Jimmy.
You don't need to be a top 10 player of all time to be in the HHOF... Lindros easily is HHOF worthy despite his shortened career.
FerrisRox
"Wanna go, Prettyboy?"
Why would you think you need to point out you don't need to be a top ten player of all time to join the Hockey Hall of Fame?
Do you think there's even a single person on this entire site that believes the Hockey Hall of Fame should be restricted to just ten players?
What a truly bizarre thing for you to say.
FerrisRox
"Wanna go, Prettyboy?"
While I agree with the point you are making, Voracek, at his best, was much better than Andreychuk ever was.
Gardner McKay
RIP, Jimmy.
I don't know. Because I was talking about Lindros and it is something I believe? Frankly, I'm not sure why that even matters. What a truly bizarre thing for you to say.
CanadienShark
Registered User
- Dec 18, 2012
- 37,482
- 10,756
izzy
go
Compiler in a high scoring era.
At his absolute best season ever, he scored 50 goals which put him 9th.
That puts him in Max Paccioretty / Cam Atkinson category.
Let me rephrase this.
If Paccioretty put up a mediocre scoring pace of 25 goals for the next 12 years. Do you think patches should be in the Hall?
He'll have over 500 goals, but Patches today is pretty much the same calibre of player Gartner was.
FerrisRox
"Wanna go, Prettyboy?"
I'd argue that Paccioretty is better. Max has two-way skills that Mike Gartner never had.
MadLuke
Registered User
- Jan 18, 2011
- 9,552
- 5,185
2003 had a giant start, but some like Phaneuf, Perry, Staal, Vanek, Parise, Mike Richards/Jeff Carter, Brown, Eriksson, Horton, Kesler, didn't age all that well, but Burns went the other way around.
Getzlaf, Bergeron, Fleury, Weber/Suter, Burns could make it, who else, Staal and Perry ?
izzy
go
CanadienShark
Registered User
- Dec 18, 2012
- 37,482
- 10,756
You must have never seen him play.
He was aiight.
Like Paccioretty, or Atkinson. Not a phenom, and never one of the top 10 players in the league. But he played for a long time and was "aiight" for most of it.
He belongs in the hall of "aiight".
Ad
Upcoming events
-
-
Eisbaren Berlin @ Pinguins Bremerhaven - Eisbaren Berlin leads series 3-1Wagers: 5Staked: $6,549.00Event closes- Updated:
-
BET ON ONLY ONE HORSE Bewitch Stakes (Gr. 3) - KEENELAND RACE 8Wagers: 6Staked: $2,300.00Event closes- Updated:
-
-
