Tim Kerr or Cam Neely?

[Lafleurs Guy]

Yep, I agree that inducting guys like Duff has really lowered the bar, but I think that even if the standards were higher Selanne could very well be a first ballot guy.

Maybe. He had some pretty good seasons and he greatly helped himself by coming back with two really good years and winning a cup.

To me though, first ballot guys should be saved for the Bourques, Coffeys, Lafleurs and Yzermans. The true greats of the game. I don't think Selanne falls into that catergory.

Did I upset you?

No.

 

[lextune]

Cam Neely.

His 50 goals in 44 games is unmatched by anyone short of Gretz

Exactly. The 50 goals in 50 games (or less) is one of the most exclusive goal scorers clubs there is.

Richard
Bossy
Gretzky
Kurri
Lemieux
Hull
Mogilny
Neely

Neely's 50

 

[Randall Graves*]

Thanks for picking that up. I stand corrected.

They should overlook Lindros' and Neely's health problems? Okay, then let's overlook Cicarelli's. Let's overlook Roenick's. Hell, let's put Richer in the HOF because after all he had clinical depression to deal with. We can stamp Paul Kariya's ticket right now and Pelle Lindberg makes it too. And if we're going to do that, there's no way Tim Kerr doesn't make it. Kerr has more dominant seasons than Neely has.

The HOF is entirely political. If Neely had played for the Nashville Predators instead of an original six team, there's no way he'd make it. The commitee (its not done by sportswriters from every city in the league) plays favourites and its entirely inconsistent with who they do and don't let in.

Players should get in based on what they did, not what they might have done. Don Mattingly (a career .300 hitter with an MVP) had a much better relative career than either Lindros or Neely and he doesn't sniff Baseball's Hall. Dale Murphy won two consecutive MVP awards and he's not close to a HOF player. Even Andre Dawson (the guy in my avatar) is a borderline HOF who still hasn't made it. They save it for the best and we let in guys who don't belong.

He's a HHOF lock because we let in mediocre players. He'd be borderline if we only let in the best. But I agree that he'd have to garner serious consideration and even under more stringent conditions he might make it (though not on the first ballot.)

If you let in just the best Selanne should still be in when you look at the body of work. Also his 98 season is one of the most underrated seasons since I started following hockey. He had zero help that year with the Kariya contract dispute, that team was putrid. 52 goals, 86 points, 33 more than the next closest teammate. They hung around in the playoff race, and I think they would have made it if Suter didn't cheapshot Kariya.

He's not on the Lemiuex/Gretzky/Orr level but if he comes back this year he has an outside shot at 600 goals and would get over 1,200 points. Imagine where he'd be if A)He had never torn his achilles, you think he's fast now, before that injury he was arguably the fastest player in the league. and B)The knee injuries that plagued him the few years before the lockout.

Everyone says what if with Neely, well Selanne might be approaching 700 goals and 1500 points right now.

 

[LouJersey]

I'm the biggest Neely fan in the world maybe and this one is a real tough call.

Tim Kerr was an absolute goal scoring monster. Remember too, Kerr lost an entire season basically right in the middle of his prime, bounced back big time with what would have been yet another 50 goal season had he not missed 11 games in 88-89.

Neely was more of a physical presence IMO, but if you ask defensemen who played during that time many will say there was no better down low player, stronger, tougher then Kerr.

He may be the most underrated player of the decade of the 80's, that's for sure.

I would take Neely, but I could hardly begrudge anyone who would take Kerr.

 

[LouJersey]

Sure, and that's exactly my point. What the heck is Joe Mullen doing in there? Why is Steve Shutt there?

It should be called the Hall of Very Good...

Lindros doesn't belong there either. But I'd put him in before Neely at least. He was the best player in the world at one point.

Neely makes it but not Kerr. Shutt makes it but not Ciccarelli. Federko makes it but not Anderson...

There's zero consistency here.

I think the fact that Neely retired at age 30 had alot to do with it..plus, his 50 in 44, his goal scoring in the play-offs..his being the next blue print for what all teams wanted to draft....Nobody was saying, "Hopefully, we've just drafted the next Tim Kerr"...maybe his tireless charity work off the ice...who knows...there isn't much consistency to it...

 

[LouJersey]

That's like voting in Roger Maris. And Neely's season (not to mention his career) isn't nearly as impressive as Maris' was.

Sorry, but Neely has 3 HOF calibre seasons and not much beyond it. There's no way that should warrant a HOF nod. I don't care how physical he was. If you're going to make it based on 3 seasons (which should never happen) you'd better at least win some awards along the way.

There's some validity to that I agree. I don't think Andreychuck should make it either. But just because some of those guys who weren't dominant shouldn't make it, it doesn't mean that Neely and Lindros should. 500/1000 should be the minimum stats, not a guarantee of entry. If you have less than that your career had better be exceptional.

And Ciccarelli at least has the totals to be considered. And hey, if we're going to play the shoulda game with Neely and Kerr, how about Cicarelli? He got off to a goal per game pace just as he was coming into his prime and then wrecked his knee and his season. Maybe he would've been a 50 in 50 guy. Maybe Roenick would've been an all-time superstar if he hadn't hurt himself back in '95. Let's cut them some slack too. And Ciccarelli has 2 50 goal seasons, 600 goals and 1200 points. How can you say he doesn't make it but support Neely? That makes no sense.

You can woulda,coulda,shoulda this to death. Bottom line is that allowing a 1990s scorer in with less than 700 points is a disgrace. Esp when the guy has no major awards or first team all-stars to speak of. This isn't a Bobby Orr, Ken Dryden 'short-but-brilliant' type career we're talking about here. Those guys dominated from day one, won cups, awards and Hart trophies. And if anything Kerr can at least point to 5 seasons that are HOF worthy and got some Hart consideration so I'm not sure how he's left standing outside while Neely's in.

At least Lindros supporters can argue that he was the best in the world at one point. Neely and Kerr were never close.

One thing....Dino, 600 goals, should be in...no excuse not to be, although he was never a league favorite.

Secondly, Lindros didn't have near the competition Neely and Kerr did to be considered the best....let's compare apples and apples please.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

I'm the biggest Neely fan in the world maybe and this one is a real tough call.

Tim Kerr was an absolute goal scoring monster. Remember too, Kerr lost an entire season basically right in the middle of his prime, bounced back big time with what would have been yet another 50 goal season had he not missed 11 games in 88-89.

Neely was more of a physical presence IMO, but if you ask defensemen who played during that time many will say there was no better down low player, stronger, tougher then Kerr.

He may be the most underrated player of the decade of the 80's, that's for sure.

I would take Neely, but I could hardly begrudge anyone who would take Kerr.

Totally agree. Though I think Neely gets the nod overall, I'm glad to see Kerr get some recognition. He was the best on the PP I ever saw. No one could handle him in front of the net. 9th all-time goals per game (Neely 14th).

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

One thing....Dino, 600 goals, should be in...no excuse not to be, although he was never a league favorite.

Secondly, Lindros didn't have near the competition Neely and Kerr did to be considered the best....let's compare apples and apples please.

Apples to apples, Lindros was far better than either Neely or Kerr. That's not a slag on the other two guys either. Lindros was a beast.

Yes, he didn't have Lemieux and Gretzky to contend with in their primes but even if you had taken out Lemieux and Gretz... Kerr and Neely weren't close to the best players of their day. They were both really good though. Its a shame all three wound up with the injuries that they did. To this day I think Kerr would've been one of the all-time great goal scorers if he could've stayed healthy.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

I'm the biggest Neely fan in the world maybe and this one is a real tough call.

Tim Kerr was an absolute goal scoring monster. Remember too, Kerr lost an entire season basically right in the middle of his prime, bounced back big time with what would have been yet another 50 goal season had he not missed 11 games in 88-89.

Neely was more of a physical presence IMO, but if you ask defensemen who played during that time many will say there was no better down low player, stronger, tougher then Kerr.

He may be the most underrated player of the decade of the 80's, that's for sure.

I would take Neely, but I could hardly begrudge anyone who would take Kerr.

I agree. And I think Kerr is actually the most underrated player of the 80s as well.

I think the fact that Neely retired at age 30 had alot to do with it..plus, his 50 in 44, his goal scoring in the play-offs..his being the next blue print for what all teams wanted to draft....Nobody was saying, "Hopefully, we've just drafted the next Tim Kerr"...maybe his tireless charity work off the ice...who knows...there isn't much consistency to it...

Kerr had to quit hockey because his wife died in childbirth. The guy basically quit to take care of his kids.

Its just like the 'real world' its not what you know, its who you know. I don't begrudge Neely anything btw, by all accounts he's a stand up guy and what happened to him is terrible. I just think the NHL needs to be more consistent on this kind of thing. Anyways, at least a nice guy made it into the Hall.

 

[LouJersey]

I agree. And I think Kerr is actually the most underrated player of the 80s as well.

Kerr had to quit hockey because his wife died in childbirth. The guy basically quit to take care of his kids.

Its just like the 'real world' its not what you know, its who you know. I don't begrudge Neely anything btw, by all accounts he's a stand up guy and what happened to him is terrible. I just think the NHL needs to be more consistent on this kind of thing. Anyways, at least a nice guy made it into the Hall.

Great post.

I think once Gillies got in, Neely was a no brainer. The problem now, Kerr should be in. Dino should be in. Glenn Anderson should be in. Also, you can easily now say Lindros should be in...Rick Tocchett? Will he get in?

 

[canucks4ever]

Great post.

I think once Gillies got in, Neely was a no brainer. The problem now, Kerr should be in. Dino should be in. Glenn Anderson should be in. Also, you can easily now say Lindros should be in...Rick Tocchett? Will he get in?

Yeah it does puzzle me. Gillies, Schutt and Barber are in the HOF cuz they were part of dynasty teams. Glenn Anderson was a part of a dynasty and he had more elite seasons than them, yet he is left out, kind awkward.

 

[lextune]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8252f0HJLL4