Why is Gilmour not in the Hall of Fame?

[Jumptheshark]

Look how long they made Anderson wait. HE will get in soner or later

 

[canucks4ever]

Another thing that might be held against Gilmour is that he has a lot of lackluster seasons. I mean sure he was great in 87 and 93-94, and had a few other very good seasons. However Gilmour had inconsistency issues which prevented him from truly becoming a 'franchise' player.

People on this site will say Gilmour is better than Modano, but I guarantee Modano won't have to wait as long as Douggie is. With Modano you knew he was going to score 75-92 points in any given season before the puck would drop, with Gilmour you had no idea.

 

[MS]

Another thing that might be held against Gilmour is that he has a lot of lackluster seasons. I mean sure he was great in 87 and 93-94, and had a few other very good seasons. However Gilmour had inconsistency issues which prevented him from truly becoming a 'franchise' player.

People on this site will say Gilmour is better than Modano, but I guarantee Modano won't have to wait as long as Douggie is. With Modano you knew he was going to score 75-92 points in any given season before the puck would drop, with Gilmour you had no idea.

Uh, really?

Gilmour had 80+ points every year from 1986-1994, then was a bit iffy during the lockout year, then had seasons of 72 and 82 points from 1995-97.

Basically for 11 years between 1986-1997 (when he was aged 23-34 so basically the bulk of his career) the guy was pretty well money in the bank for 80 points. And averaged 90 points/season.

Sure, his last 6 seasons (aged 35-40) were hit-and-miss (although he had one really strong 73-point year in there at age 37), but that holds for most players. The player you use as a benchmark (Modano) only had 1 season over 60 points past the age of 33.

 

[Kyle McMahon]

Another thing that might be held against Gilmour is that he has a lot of lackluster seasons. I mean sure he was great in 87 and 93-94, and had a few other very good seasons. However Gilmour had inconsistency issues which prevented him from truly becoming a 'franchise' player.

People on this site will say Gilmour is better than Modano, but I guarantee Modano won't have to wait as long as Douggie is. With Modano you knew he was going to score 75-92 points in any given season before the puck would drop, with Gilmour you had no idea.

I agree, but that will have a lot more to due with nationality than with ability. I probably rate Modano higher than the majority of people around here, but I would still take Gilmour without much hesitation.

 

[John Flyers Fan]

Look how long they made Anderson wait. HE will get in soner or later

Gilmour was significantly better than Anderson.

 

[Big Phil]

Another thing that might be held against Gilmour is that he has a lot of lackluster seasons. I mean sure he was great in 87 and 93-94, and had a few other very good seasons. However Gilmour had inconsistency issues which prevented him from truly becoming a 'franchise' player.

People on this site will say Gilmour is better than Modano, but I guarantee Modano won't have to wait as long as Douggie is. With Modano you knew he was going to score 75-92 points in any given season before the puck would drop, with Gilmour you had no idea.

But Modano never hit a peak where he had 127 or 111 points. Modano never had more than 93 and his two way game was good but I'd take Gilmour's defense over it still.

Plus Modano never had a Hart Trophy caliber season. Gilmour had a couple.

 

[Ohashi_Jouzu*]

I agree, but that will have a lot more to due with nationality than with ability. I probably rate Modano higher than the majority of people around here, but I would still take Gilmour without much hesitation.

Me too, but with just a bit of hesitation. IMO, Modano's best hockey wasn't his biggest goal scoring/points years; it was between '98-01/02. Those years, added to his early/mid 90s, give him a good 5 year snapshot that almost compares to the level of play Gilmour showed over his 5 year snapshot (they weren't all as good as 92/93, 93/94). Almost.

 

[Jumptheshark]

Gilmour was significantly better than Anderson.

sorry

I disagree with that statement

 

[MS]

sorry

I disagree with that statement

You're going to have to qualify that.

Gilmour had a longer prime (11 years vs. 7 years).

Gilmour had a better prime (more Hart consideration, higher-scoring seasons with a worse supporting cast).

Gilmour was better defensively.

Gilmour has pretty much an identical playoff scoring record despite playing with, again, a substantially worse supporting cast.

Gilmour has better career numbers.

On what basis is Anderson better than Gilmour?

 

[canucks4ever]

Uh, really?

Gilmour had 80+ points every year from 1986-1994, then was a bit iffy during the lockout year, then had seasons of 72 and 82 points from 1995-97.

Basically for 11 years between 1986-1997 (when he was aged 23-34 so basically the bulk of his career) the guy was pretty well money in the bank for 80 points. And averaged 90 points/season.

Sure, his last 6 seasons (aged 35-40) were hit-and-miss (although he had one really strong 73-point year in there at age 37), but that holds for most players. The player you use as a benchmark (Modano) only had 1 season over 60 points past the age of 33.

Modano started putting up good numbers when he was 20, Gilmour didnt hit star numbers until he was 24.

Modano's prime was 1997-2003, you would have to adjust stats to compare thier seasons. Another thing, Gilmour only finished 4th in 1994 because alot of people missed games that season, in ppg he was ranked 9th.

The gap between Gilmour and Modano shouldnt be that huge, people on these board exaggerate the greatness of Gilmour and Fedorov.

Modano is going to the hall of fame as soon as hes eligible. I think people dont like him because he played a non-physical style and he was a preppy boy 'prima donna' type.

 

[MS]

Modano started putting up good numbers when he was 20, Gilmour didnt hit star numbers until he was 24.

Modano's prime was 1997-2003, you would have to adjust stats to compare thier seasons. Another thing, Gilmour only finished 4th in 1994 because alot of people missed games that season, in ppg he was ranked 9th.

The gap between Gilmour and Modano shouldnt be that huge, people on these board exaggerate the greatness of Gilmour and Fedorov.

Modano is going to the hall of fame as soon as hes eligible. I think people dont like him because he played a non-physical style and he was a preppy boy 'prima donna' type.

I like Modano and consider him a sure-fire HHOFer, and I wasn't disputing Modano vs. Gilmour at all, except in terms of their consistency.

You claimed that Gilmour was inconsistent relative to a guy like Modano. He wasn't. He had an 11-year stretch where he was pretty well money in the bank to score 80 points.

For the record, I'd probably put in Modano before Gilmour - I put a high value on value to a franchise and value to a player's country, and Modano is off the charts on both counts.

 

[seventieslord]

sorry

I disagree with that statement

explain.

 

[Big Phil]

Modano started putting up good numbers when he was 20, Gilmour didnt hit star numbers until he was 24.

Modano's prime was 1997-2003, you would have to adjust stats to compare thier seasons. Another thing, Gilmour only finished 4th in 1994 because alot of people missed games that season, in ppg he was ranked 9th.

The gap between Gilmour and Modano shouldnt be that huge, people on these board exaggerate the greatness of Gilmour and Fedorov.

Modano is going to the hall of fame as soon as hes eligible. I think people dont like him because he played a non-physical style and he was a preppy boy 'prima donna' type.

When a player has the reputation of being a winner and a clutch performer that will always give him an extra boost. This is how we view Gilmour and Fedorov. Modano was a near great player and along with Sundin was remarkably consistent. Even if he was Canadian he would still be a Hall of Famer. I don't put a lot of stock in him being an American.

But the truth is if he didn't have that Cup in '99 and the other run to the finals in 2000 he'd have a hard time ever getting in. There would be a stigma against him that he never won anything or got close. Marcel Dionne can get away with it because he did everything else right in his career. But Modano is borderline enough that without that there'd be a lot of arguments against him.

Again this is why Gilmour is Gilmour (6th in playoff points) and Fedorov is how we remember him (4 straight years of 20+ playoff points).

 

[Kyle McMahon]

Me too, but with just a bit of hesitation. IMO, Modano's best hockey wasn't his biggest goal scoring/points years; it was between '98-01/02. Those years, added to his early/mid 90s, give him a good 5 year snapshot that almost compares to the level of play Gilmour showed over his 5 year snapshot (they weren't all as good as 92/93, 93/94). Almost.

I agree. Modano was one of the scariest players in the league to go up against from '97-'03. A very intelligent offensive player who was excellent defensively as well. Gilmour probably has the two best years between them, but I'd argue that Modano might have four of the next five after that, so for prime value, the two are very comparable.

What seperates Gilmour from Modano is the physical dimension and leadership. Leadership is probably the biggest knock on Modano as far as I can tell. While Modano may have been the Stars' best player during their heyday, it became fairly clear after the fact that the Nieuwendyk's, Keane's, and Carbonneau's were the ones leading that team into battle. Once they, along with Hitchcock, were gone, Dallas generally underachieved and lost their killer instinct. I'm not in the locker room, but Modano just never looked like an inspiring and confident captain the way a Gilmour-type was. The captaincy eventually being turned over to Brendan Morrow somewhat confirmed this thought.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

somewhat OT, but re: anderson and having to wait, allegedly because of not paying child support, a few people in this thread http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=707474 have mentioned that it is common knowledge that anderson is gay-- and openly gay to many in the hockey community. i had never heard that before. has anybody here? and could that have played a role? i would like to think that is not the case, but it wouldn't surprise me.

 

[Big Phil]

somewhat OT, but re: anderson and having to wait, allegedly because of not paying child support, a few people in this thread http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=707474 have mentioned that it is common knowledge that anderson is gay-- and openly gay to many in the hockey community. i had never heard that before. has anybody here? and could that have played a role? i would like to think that is not the case, but it wouldn't surprise me.

Just a rumour. There were questions about a friend of his allegedly dying in his pool but that's all I heard. Anderson is married last I checked, to a woman. He knocked up another woman in 1989 from Vancouver. He was a deadbeat dad and that hurt his image, but no he isn't gay.

 

[william_adams]

Here's a theory: it's because he's a 7th round pick. One of the posters above suggested that they didn't think of gilmour as a hall of famer when he was playing - maybe that's because he snuck up on greatness. Mike modano, number one pick, everybody knew he'd be great. Same with sundin (who I'm sure will also get in first ballot).

How many late round draft picks have ever become first ballot hall of famers?

 

[MXD]

Here's a theory: it's because he's a 7th round pick. One of the posters above suggested that they didn't think of gilmour as a hall of famer when he was playing - maybe that's because he snuck up on greatness. Mike modano, number one pick, everybody knew he'd be great. Same with sundin (who I'm sure will also get in first ballot).

How many late round draft picks have ever become first ballot hall of famers?

Humm.... Robitaille, Luc.

 

[Big Phil]

Here's a theory: it's because he's a 7th round pick. One of the posters above suggested that they didn't think of gilmour as a hall of famer when he was playing - maybe that's because he snuck up on greatness. Mike modano, number one pick, everybody knew he'd be great. Same with sundin (who I'm sure will also get in first ballot).

How many late round draft picks have ever become first ballot hall of famers?

Interesting theory, although like the above poster said Robitaille would be one of them. Zetterberg too if he has the credentials.

Yes I have said it before, Gilmour gets overshadowed even in his era. In 1989 you don't think about him right away because that was a stacked team. Heck, people still claim McDonald scored the Cup winning goal which is false. It was Gilmour. This alone shows you he can be underrated and even fly under the radar. But this poll is showing it's true colours, there aren't many that think he didn't have a good enough career.

 

[nik jr]

Humm.... Robitaille, Luc.

and brett hull was 6th round.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Here's a theory: it's because he's a 7th round pick. One of the posters above suggested that they didn't think of gilmour as a hall of famer when he was playing - maybe that's because he snuck up on greatness. Mike modano, number one pick, everybody knew he'd be great. Same with sundin (who I'm sure will also get in first ballot).

How many late round draft picks have ever become first ballot hall of famers?

I don't think many people but draft nuts / hfboards posters care about draft position by the time a player has finished his career.

 

[william_adams]

I don't think many people but draft nuts / hfboards posters care about draft position by the time a player has finished his career.

really? marc savard (4th round) or shane doan (7th overall). who has the better reputation? guys drafted in the first round have such a head start in the news coverage department...

luc robitaille is a good example of a late rounder, but that one still puzzles me (not him getting in, just how it came so quick..)

 

[seventieslord]

I don't think many people but draft nuts / hfboards posters care about draft position by the time a player has finished his career.

We absolutely don't. Why should we? It's all about results.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

really? marc savard (4th round) or shane doan (7th overall). who has the better reputation? guys drafted in the first round have such a head start in the news coverage department...

luc robitaille is a good example of a late rounder, but that one still puzzles me (not him getting in, just how it came so quick..)

I mean, draft status probably affects a player's news coverage for the first 2, maybe 3 years after he makes it in the big league. After that, we only hear about his draft position if he was a top 5 pick bust.

Doan has a better reputation because Savard was a one-dimensional playmaker who was horrible in his own end and took lots of bad penalties until a few years ago. Draft position has nothing to do with it.

 

[PKV Jungle Friends]

Personally, I thought he and Oates were better hockey players than Robitaille.

Come on...seriously?

Luc is one of the best LWs in NHL history...