Why isn't Pierre Turgeon in the hall of fame?

Albatros

Registered User
Aug 19, 2017
12,274
7,723
Ostsee
That still could have been Damphousse. The guy was the leading regular season and playoff scorer on the 1993 Habs. I honestly have no idea why they didn't pick him at that time.

Could have been, and eventually was, but Turgeon has some characteristic similarity to Béliveau which no doubt elevated him in that situation. Damphousse's charm was more about being the vet in the room that would lead the team by example.
 

frisco

Some people claim that there's a woman to blame...
Sep 14, 2017
3,553
2,643
Northern Hemisphere
But you have to use things in context here. You say "he outproduced many a high profile player". You are simply just adding up a bunch of vanilla years in the playoffs and showing that he has a better PPG than some guys who played in more games. You can never pick a year where he "wowed" anyone. Nor is there a year where he did what some of these above guys did.
He never had a huge 25+ point year. However, he made up for that by producing consistently while some other guy maybe "wowed" with one or two great playoffs but disappeared in others. In the aggregate, he performed better overall in a large sample than guys who are thought of has better playoff scorers.

Pavel Datsyuk had some big years. But when he was aged 23-27 he had 3 goals and 12 assists in 42 games to start his playoff career. So taking the good and the bad together he was 0.72 points/game in the playoffs. Very respectable. But Turgeon was 0.89 for his career.

My Best-Carey
 

Big Phil

Registered User
Nov 2, 2003
31,703
4,144
He never had a huge 25+ point year. However, he made up for that by producing consistently while some other guy maybe "wowed" with one or two great playoffs but disappeared in others. In the aggregate, he performed better overall in a large sample than guys who are thought of has better playoff scorers.

Pavel Datsyuk had some big years. But when he was aged 23-27 he had 3 goals and 12 assists in 42 games to start his playoff career. So taking the good and the bad together he was 0.72 points/game in the playoffs. Very respectable. But Turgeon was 0.89 for his career.

My Best-Carey

Well and that's the thing. For a playoff run do you take Datsyuk or Zetterberg in a playoff run or do you pick Turgeon? I'd pick one of the first two, especially in the postseason where two-way play becomes that much more critical. There is no doubt Datsyuk had some questionable postseasons prior to, say, 2007 or so. But he did make up for it. 2008 is the obvious one of course but there again is an example of a player like him stepping up in his career. He did it, while Turgeon didn't. Nothing against Joe Thornton but Turgeon had his sort of playoff career despite playing in less playoff games and not going as deep in the playoffs regularly.

A guy like Zetterberg for example has a career 0.87 PPG in the playoffs while Turgeon has 0.88. This is why context is important. Surely you can agree Zetterberg is a noticeably better playoff performer than Turgeon right? He won the Conn Smythe, he had another year where he may have won it had his team won (I would have thought so) and in general he was more consistent compared to Datsyuk in the playoffs.

Plain Jane in the playoffs - at your best - isn't very good especially when you regularly got bounced out of the 1st round and were never able to lead your team deep. I've mentioned other players, guys who were lesser players than Turgeon who have done this. Why couldn't Turgeon?
 

Big Phil

Registered User
Nov 2, 2003
31,703
4,144
I know it's not your argument, but that isn't even an apples to apples comparison. Scoring was ~25% higher when Turgeon scored nearly half his playoff points.

Right, that too. Post-1996 is when scoring dropped. Which is why I always like to talk about context. Another thing is the two-way play Zetterberg had. Could Turgeon score 27 and 24 points in back to back trips to the final and still manage to shadow Sidney Crosby very effectively? Not a chance.
 

HawkNut

Registered User
Jun 12, 2017
725
298
My opinion is that some numbers are so good that era, context and eyeball test are irrelevant.

There are two things I've learned in all of my years studying and watching sports. Some athletes weren't as good as I remembered them. Others were better than I remembered them.
 

frisco

Some people claim that there's a woman to blame...
Sep 14, 2017
3,553
2,643
Northern Hemisphere
Well and that's the thing. For a playoff run do you take Datsyuk or Zetterberg in a playoff run or do you pick Turgeon? I'd pick one of the first two, especially in the postseason where two-way play becomes that much more critical.
That's the thing. If you take the Datsyuk who was 25 in his prime on a 109-point Detroit team upset in the second round by Calgary when he scores zero goals in 12 games I'd rather have Turgeon. Or the Stanley Cup finalist where Datsyuk scores once in sixteen games (playing with injury perhaps) I can't see how a prime Turgeon wouldn't have had a bigger impact.

I mean if you JUST look at the big years Datsyuk or Zetterberg had and simply ignore the dud playoffs where they played poorly and then do the opposite for Turgeon, of course those guys are going to come out ahead. The only fair thing to do is aggregate out the entire career in a large sample and compare:

Turgeon 97 points/107 games: 0.89/game (64th all-time)
Zetterberg 120 points/137 games: 0.88/game (72nd all-time)
Datsyuk 113/157 games: 0.72/game (176th all-time)

No I'm not knocking Zetterberg or Datsyuk. Far from it. They have and deserve their reps as clutch playoff guys. It's just when Turgeon puts up similar numbers his playoff resume is somehow held against him. That doesn't seem right.

My Best-Carey
 

trentmccleary

Registered User
Mar 2, 2002
22,226
1,100
Alfie-Ville
Visit site
Turgeon 97 points/107 games: 0.89/game (64th all-time)
Zetterberg 120 points/137 games: 0.88/game (72nd all-time)
Datsyuk 113/157 games: 0.72/game (176th all-time)

No I'm not knocking Zetterberg or Datsyuk. Far from it. They have and deserve their reps as clutch playoff guys. It's just when Turgeon puts up similar numbers his playoff resume is somehow held against him. That doesn't seem right.

If you adjusted his career numbers, Turgeon would probably have similar numbers to Datsyuk. However, both would still be notably behind Zetterberg.

You can't compare them straight across because Turgeon played half of his career in a higher scoring environment.
- he had 4 points in 6 games in the 1991 playoffs. 53 goals were scored by both teams.
- Zetterberg had 4 points in 6 games against Nashville in 2008. Only 29 goals were scored by both teams.

Overall, Zetterberg had a bigger impact in his lower scoring era than Turgeon did in his higher scoring era.
 

frisco

Some people claim that there's a woman to blame...
Sep 14, 2017
3,553
2,643
Northern Hemisphere
If you adjusted his career numbers, Turgeon would probably have similar numbers to Datsyuk. However, both would still be notably behind Zetterberg.

Overall, Zetterberg had a bigger impact in his lower scoring era than Turgeon did in his higher scoring era.
There is an adjustment but slight. Turgeon played a lot of playoff games in a low scoring era, also. From 1998-2003 when Turgeon played a bulk of his games there was less scoring than Zetterberg's Smythe season and his next year's run to the Cup. So I'd be surprised if things were radically different if you made full changes for era.

That being said, the main point in Zetterberg and Datsyuk are exalted for their post-season achievements but Turgeon, who had similar production, is somehow viewed as a poor playoff guy.

My Best-Carey
 

Albatros

Registered User
Aug 19, 2017
12,274
7,723
Ostsee
Zetterberg and Datsyuk were far better defensively most of all. Turgeon was okay but not much above average.
 

frisco

Some people claim that there's a woman to blame...
Sep 14, 2017
3,553
2,643
Northern Hemisphere
Seriously, Frisco, are you actually Sylvain Turgeon or another relative of Pierre's? You've carried this argument on for, like, 25 pages now...
Just trying to correct the great injustices of the Hockey Hall Of Fame one player at a time. Next up: Tom Barrasso.

My Best-Carey
 

Big Phil

Registered User
Nov 2, 2003
31,703
4,144
Seriously, Frisco, are you actually Sylvain Turgeon or another relative of Pierre's? You've carried this argument on for, like, 25 pages now...

I do have to admit I did find the Sylvain thing funny (sorry Frisco, I like the debates, and it's all good)

Just trying to correct the great injustices of the Hockey Hall Of Fame one player at a time. Next up: Tom Barrasso.

My Best-Carey

I can get behind the Barrasso thing. I've said it myself.

That's the thing. If you take the Datsyuk who was 25 in his prime on a 109-point Detroit team upset in the second round by Calgary when he scores zero goals in 12 games I'd rather have Turgeon. Or the Stanley Cup finalist where Datsyuk scores once in sixteen games (playing with injury perhaps) I can't see how a prime Turgeon wouldn't have had a bigger impact.

I mean if you JUST look at the big years Datsyuk or Zetterberg had and simply ignore the dud playoffs where they played poorly and then do the opposite for Turgeon, of course those guys are going to come out ahead. The only fair thing to do is aggregate out the entire career in a large sample and compare:

Turgeon 97 points/107 games: 0.89/game (64th all-time)
Zetterberg 120 points/137 games: 0.88/game (72nd all-time)
Datsyuk 113/157 games: 0.72/game (176th all-time)

No I'm not knocking Zetterberg or Datsyuk. Far from it. They have and deserve their reps as clutch playoff guys. It's just when Turgeon puts up similar numbers his playoff resume is somehow held against him. That doesn't seem right.

My Best-Carey

Granted, I am not sure how Datsyuk got dragged into this, I don't think he falls into the category of "legendary" playoff performer or anything. He does have those empty years before Detroit really took some good runs (and won a Cup). But I think you could at least see him do it once and if you throw in his defense presence he definitely would be a guy that I think a GM would say they wanted for a playoff run over Turgeon. Zetterberg for sure as well.

Hawerchuk is a fine example of what Turgeon might be. 99 points in 97 games. I don't get into the whole playoff PPG thing but he does beat Turgeon in this regard. However, he barely got out of the first round. Hawerchuk is a different case because he was much more dominant in the regular season and overall was a better player than Turgeon so his HHOF status isn't questioned, but he was normally the same, a first round exit but with around a PPG. Never had a dominant postseason, never even got into the 3rd round until 1997 when he made the final as more of a depth player. It wasn't all his fault of course, but if there is a knock on Hawerchuk it is that we could have at least seen one deep run where he was the central focus, but we didn't.

Turgeon is similar to that way, except I think I would take Hawerchuk on my team over him for a series and definitely a season.
 

seventieslord

Student Of The Game
Mar 16, 2006
36,080
7,132
Regina, SK
Anyone who knows me in this section knows I will defend Pierre Turgeon as much as can logically be done, on the basis of his offensive record. But the majority of the pro-Turgeon arguments put forward in this thread make me uncomfortable and often shudder. I think they hurt his case more than help it.
 

Big Phil

Registered User
Nov 2, 2003
31,703
4,144
Anyone who knows me in this section knows I will defend Pierre Turgeon as much as can logically be done, on the basis of his offensive record. But the majority of the pro-Turgeon arguments put forward in this thread make me uncomfortable and often shudder. I think they hurt his case more than help it.

Who would have thought you and I would actually come to an agreement on Turgeon. I don't think his playoff portfolio is the thing to bring up when campaigning for his HHOF induction. I would go at it a different angle with him.
 

sr edler

gold is not reality
Mar 20, 2010
11,845
6,290
Turgeon might not be in the HHOF, but he's got a 1,000+ posts thread on this site which hasn't been closed despite unofficial site rules saying it should be closed, so perhaps he should feel a bit special about himself anyways.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vadim sharifijanov

Theokritos

Global Moderator
Apr 6, 2010
12,538
4,911
Turgeon might not be in the HHOF, but he's got a 1,000+ posts thread on this site which hasn't been closed despite unofficial site rules saying it should be closed, so perhaps he should feel a bit special about himself anyways.

Thanks for the remainder. It rarely happens on HOH.

The discussion continues here.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->