Why did Cam Neely make it and Lindros not?

[dafoomie]

That's the problem right there... IF... Might've been... Could've been... His hip was hurt...

Tim Kerr was a monster in the playoffs. He might've won the Conn Smythe in '87 IF he didn't get hurt. The Flyers were damn close and he might've put them over the top. Does he get credit for this too?

Again, I agree. Neely had HOF talent. But two playoff runs is not that great in the grand scheme of things. Again, his totals just aren't there.

We've had this argument already, and I showed you that Neely averaged the same amount of goals and points per game, after his injury, that Kerr did in his absolute prime. The difference between a healthy Kerr and an injured Neely is that Kerr could stay on the ice for a full season because his left quadriceps wasn't turning into bone.

His dominance earlier in his career combined with the complete transformation of his game to compensate for his limitations, and still achieving the greatness he did, is why he's in.

And you know what? I don't need to have this argument. Neely's in the Hall and he always will be. Its never been about totals.

 

[Epsilon]

Instead of making a new thread I could just ask it here.

Is there any chance of Clark getting in? Besides pure Leaf homerism he did have good point totals with a career high 47 goals and 76 points in '93-'94 along with 20 points in 21 games in the 93 playoffs. Not to mention how popular he was and how good of a captain he was..will he ever get in or is he negligible?

I said earlier in this thread (or maybe it was some other, similar one) that if Dale Hunter were inducted into the HHOF, he'd easily be the worst post-expansion player there. Wendel Clark as a HOFer makes Dale Hunter look like a 1st ballot lock by comparison. Wendel Clark probably isn't even in the top 100 players from 1990 onwards.

 

[Olden McGroin]

My only knock on Bourque is that he never won a cup, it was handed to him. Colorado was stacked and would have won it regardless. But he was a great player for a very long time.

No one gets "handed" a Cup, unless they were the backup goalie or a frequent scratch. If you were a regular at Bourque's age and had to go through 4 tight checking physical playoff rounds, you earned it.

 

[Sens Rule]

I said earlier in this thread (or maybe it was some other, similar one) that if Dale Hunter were inducted into the HHOF, he'd easily be the worst post-expansion player there. Wendel Clark as a HOFer makes Dale Hunter look like a 1st ballot lock by comparison. Wendel Clark probably isn't even in the top 100 players from 1990 onwards.

Dale Hunter is not sniffing the HHOF either. I'd take Clark over Hunter, all-time. Hunter has great career value and was a very effective player. Clark's peak is quite superior in my opinion.

Again, not about career totals or anything, Clark was a deadly goal scorer, he brought a huge positive to his teams chemistry and made all kinds of momentum changing hits and fights. And he has a good resume in the limited amount of BIG GAMES he was in.

I don't know if Clark is in the top 100 since he started his career or not, probably not but IMO he had a more "great" career and impact than Hunter in a lot fewer games. And Hunter as dirty and maligned as he was, was a very effective player as a pest and as a secondary scorer for a very long time. Still it is Clark for me. The wrist shot, the sheer energy and passion he had, and his excellent goal scoring ability trumps Hunter and his long lasting consistent play.

It is like Joe Mullen or Dino Ciccarelli vs Neely. Who is better? I'd take Neely easily even though he has that shorter career and a series of injuries and shortened seasons. Same thing Hunter vs Wendel Clark.

 

[Sens Rule]

No one gets "handed" a Cup, unless they were the backup goalie or a frequent scratch. If you were a regular at Bourque's age and had to go through 4 tight checking physical playoff rounds, you earned it.

And he wasn't just a regular he was one of Colorado's best and most important players.