I don't think a lot of fans realize how little use the executives, the coaches and the players care about stats. It's probably the sport that has the least emphasis on stats by those in the game. Remember when Shanahan scored his 600th goal? The interviewer asked him about what it meant. He said it would be the victories and the players he played with that he would reflect on once his career is finished, and not the statistical milestones, like the 600th goal. I think you'd find that most players have the same attitude. Players who do care about their statistics are often regarded as selfish, troublesome, cancers, or as "addition by subtraction" types.
Part of the problem is that there are so many elements of the game that aren't measured on stats. There isn't a stat to measure a player's ability to win the battles in the corners, win the battles in front of the net, make the big defensive play (there's more to great defensive play than just takeaways), create intimidation, create a presence, or make the timely save at the right time. (Which happens more than just late in the third period of a close game). Bob McKenzie said it best in his book, "Hockey Dad," when he said that competitiveness is a skill. There's no stat for competitiveness, but it's a skill that's one of the most sought-after once you get to the game's upper levels.
Adjusted stats? Nobody in the game cares about that. They want to be remembered for who they were and what they did and what they accomplished, not for what a calculator would say they might have done.[/B] No NHL player would ever want to have a calculator involved in judging his career. Nobody cares really about their shooting percentage. Goalies might be able to tell you their career numbers for wins and shutouts, but none of them could tell you their career save percentage or their career goals against average. How do you quantify a defensive forward? You can't. How do you quantify a defensive defenceman? You won't.
I think stats are for fans and the media. I think most of us would be really surprised how unaware players are about their numbers. In many cases, I think the only way they would know is if a reporter told them, or if their agent tells them during contract negotiations. I noted in an argument for Martin St. Louis in the HHOF that he's been year-in, and year-out, the best playmaking winger in the league for nearly a decade. He's so slick and creative, so smart, so dynamic with the puck, and willing to take a hit to make a play, that he makes the players around him better. (When he chooses to play the goal-scorer role, he's damn good at that, too). But for the benefit of fans who like their numbers, I noted that at the time he'd been No. 1 in assists among wingers three out of six years. (It's now four out of seven, including the last two and three of the last four. He's also been No. 2 in assists among wingers once, finishing behind that Jagr guy in 2006-07). The thing is, we can go to
www.hockey-reference.com and look at top 10s and find that out. Marty St. Louis probably couldn't tell you how many times he's been No. 1 for assists among wingers. He probably doesn't care. He couldn't tell you how many times he's finished in the top 10 in goals, assists or points. He might be able to tell you his point total from 2003-04, when he won the Hart and the Art Ross, but he's more likely to remember his game-winning goal in Game 6 of the Stanley Cup final.
The selection process for the HHOF certainly has its flaws. I've argued that we need a larger selection committee. Expand it from 18 (its current size) to 40. That'll prevent the occasional oddball selection (Clarke Gillies, for example). At the same time, the composition of the committee - with former players, executives, coaches and officials, along with media members - is far better in baseball.
Hockey's a completely different beast from any other sport in terms of using stats in evaluations. Maybe it's a Canadian thing. Maybe it's because many players have been told for a long time that statistics are for losers. Or maybe it's just because so many elements of the game aren't measured in statistics, and never will be. But to have a "quantifiable HOF system" is insulting to the game and the HOF, and most players would tell you it's nothing short of bull****.