HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   The History of Hockey (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=126)
-   -   Theo Fleury Should Be in the Hall of Fame (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1217513)

ginopuck 06-26-2012 02:33 PM

Theo Fleury Should Be in the Hall of Fame
 
Considering his stats and the impact he had on the league and the game I think he should've been a part of the Class of 2012. If not the Class of 2012 then he should be at the very least a part of the Class of 2013. Any thoughts?

vadim sharifijanov 06-26-2012 02:34 PM

i don't think he was more deserving than anyone in this year's class, but yes i agree he should get in someday.

the edler 06-26-2012 02:44 PM

i liked his game, he was feisty :D

kmad 06-26-2012 02:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the edler (Post 51561167)
i liked his game, he was feisty :D

Can't wait for the unveiling of the "feisty" wing of the Hall.

tarheelhockey 06-26-2012 03:00 PM

I've never really thought of him as a candidate. What's his argument?

kmad 06-26-2012 03:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tarheelhockey (Post 51562173)
I've never really thought of him as a candidate. What's his argument?

He's small but did real good!

the edler 06-26-2012 03:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tarheelhockey (Post 51562173)
What's his argument?

he's a ppg+ player both in the regular season and in the playoffs, won a cup, a canada cup, the olympics

if you look at his numbers per season he's pretty similar to shanahan

tarheelhockey 06-26-2012 03:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the edler (Post 51562473)
he's a ppg+ player both in the regular season and in the playoffs, won a cup, won a world cup

if you look at his numbers he's pretty similar to shanahan

I dunno, that's getting awfully close to Alexander Mogilny territory.

vadim sharifijanov 06-26-2012 03:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tarheelhockey (Post 51562173)
I've never really thought of him as a candidate. What's his argument?

one of the most memorable and unique players of his time, absolutely means the world to a specific fanbase, didn't win a cup but put up some memorable playoff performances, oozed love of the game. basically, the cam neely argument.

vadim sharifijanov 06-26-2012 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tarheelhockey (Post 51562785)
I dunno, that's getting awfully close to Alexander Mogilny territory.

this is why i think fleury should be at least a strong HHOF candidate:

today was the first time a player who actually accomplished meaningful things in a canucks uniform made it into the HHOF. you can't begin to overestimate what that means to vancouver fans. one fan on the canucks board said she cried on the bus when she heard.

basically, bure getting in validates our hockey watching experiences. our love for those early 90s teams, the superhuman things we saw bure do, those are no longer just our memories. they have become legitimized as memories and experiences that matter in the grand scheme of things. to a habs fan, guy lafleur getting in doesn't make a whole of difference. but to a canucks fan, bure getting in makes a huge difference.

i think you get the same thing with sundin and swedish hockey fans.

in a sense, this is an argument for the hockey hall of fame acknowledging the importance of regionalism, and the history/memories/experiences of specific underrepresented cities and countries.

now, obviously if fleury got in next year, he wouldn't be the first nor the last flame to get in. but to calgary fans of a certain age, he was the greatest flame of all. greater than lanny, chopper, and iginla. or if nothing else, he arguably means more to calgary fans as any of those guys, including iginla.

there are few guys that resonate with a fanbase on that kind of meaningful level. to mention only guys who are debatable HHOF choices: neely in boston, bure in vancouver, sundin in sweden -- and i suspect federko in st. louis and langway in washington could be added to that list, but i'm not sure.

i just saw the senna documentary. what senna meant to brazil, what pacquiao means to the philippines, what ali, jim brown, and bill russell mean to african-americans, to me that's the most meaningful thing in sports. what i'm talking about for the HHOF would be analogous but on a smaller scale.

and that's why it doesn't make sense to look at fleury's career and ask, "why fleury and not mogilny?" because mogilny, nieuwendyk, and turgeon never captured a city/country's imagination and no city or country ever saw themselves in what that one guy did on the ice. tarheelhockey, you're a carolina fan. imagine if ron francis had never played in pittsburgh and spent his entire career in the whalers/canes organization. maybe he retires with andreychuk stats and no individual honours or top five finishes. i think you would still argue that he belongs in the hall of fame and i think you would be right.

vadim sharifijanov 06-26-2012 04:03 PM

one last thing, i think if we buy what i just wrote above, we would also have to use common sense to differentiate bure, neely, and sundin from mike richter, trevor linden, wendel clark, or paul henderson.

to me, fleury makes the cut but i concede that it's a fine line.

quoipourquoi 06-26-2012 04:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vadim sharifijanov (Post 51562803)
one of the most memorable and unique players of his time, absolutely means the world to a specific fanbase, didn't win a cup but put up some memorable playoff performances, oozed love of the game. basically, the cam neely argument.

He won a Stanley Cup. Hell, he won just about everything except a World Championship and a Memorial Cup (he won a Turner Cup instead).

vadim sharifijanov 06-26-2012 04:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by quoipourquoi (Post 51567533)
He won a Stanley Cup. Hell, he won just about everything except a World Championship and a Memorial Cup (he won a Turner Cup instead).

right, of course. total brain fart on my part.

tarheelhockey 06-26-2012 05:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vadim sharifijanov (Post 51565269)
today was the first time a player who actually accomplished meaningful things in a canucks uniform made it into the HHOF. you can't begin to overestimate what that means to vancouver fans. one fan on the canucks board said she cried on the bus when she heard.

You know what's really sad? Even after going over Bure's career with a fine-toothed comb in the other thread, I spent 30 confused seconds trying to remember something meaningful that Sundin did in Vancouver :laugh:

I buy the rest of what you said. We get caught up in the "who has a better profile" game when it comes to HOF inductions, and it's harder to avoid with every borderline induction. I'd much rather have a true Hall of Fame, which celebrates the culture of the game rather than stats and awards.

The list of 4-year goal leaders in the Stamkos thread also got me thinking about how empty the Dead Puck Era seems in retrospect. Nothing against guys like Naslund and Tkachuk, but it just doesn't seem like they were ever really the kind of superstars that would be at the top of an era. I suspect that in a few years we'll run into a relatively dead phase of HOF inductions after we exhaust the obvious candidates from that 1998-2004 range -- maybe that would be a good time to think about Fleury.

IggyFan12 06-26-2012 07:34 PM

I think the fact that he couldn't get past the first round on some great Flames teams may hurt his chances. Same with Vernon.

Krut 06-26-2012 07:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IggyFan12 (Post 51575527)
I think the fact that he couldn't get past the first round on some great Flames teams may hurt his chances. Same with Vernon.

I think it's his off ice antics that are keeping him out of the hall more than anything else. He was an utter embarrassment when he was in New York and Chicago. Maybe in time this will be forgotten and he will get in, but some of those wounds might be a little too fresh for some in the selection committee.

vadim sharifijanov 06-27-2012 01:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tarheelhockey (Post 51568183)
You know what's really sad? Even after going over Bure's career with a fine-toothed comb in the other thread, I spent 30 confused seconds trying to remember something meaningful that Sundin did in Vancouver :laugh:

I buy the rest of what you said. We get caught up in the "who has a better profile" game when it comes to HOF inductions, and it's harder to avoid with every borderline induction. I'd much rather have a true Hall of Fame, which celebrates the culture of the game rather than stats and awards.

The list of 4-year goal leaders in the Stamkos thread also got me thinking about how empty the Dead Puck Era seems in retrospect. Nothing against guys like Naslund and Tkachuk, but it just doesn't seem like they were ever really the kind of superstars that would be at the top of an era. I suspect that in a few years we'll run into a relatively dead phase of HOF inductions after we exhaust the obvious candidates from that 1998-2004 range -- maybe that would be a good time to think about Fleury.

seems reasonable to me. i wouldn't induct fleury over, say, gilmour, mark howe, belfour, bure, sakic obviously, shanahan, sundin, or oates, and he'd be behind lindros, makarov, chelios obviously, niedermayer, shanahan, modano, recchi, lidstrom obviously, and maybe a few others in the next bunch of years. but definitely there's no question in my mind you go with fleury before you even bring up the names naslund, roenick, tkachuk, leclair, turgeon, etc.

i'd like to see a lull year somewhere five to ten years down the road where we are debating fleury with elias and other borderline guys.

Big Phil 06-27-2012 02:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IggyFan12 (Post 51575527)
I think the fact that he couldn't get past the first round on some great Flames teams may hurt his chances. Same with Vernon.

I think for Flames fans, historians or anyone who saw the games at that time you would think Fleury is the last person to blame for those failures. He racked up a healthy spread of points, even in those first round losses. No one should blame Fleury for those failures. Rightfully so, this is a lull in Vernon's career that is what has kept him from the HHOF so far. From an observational point of view Vernon gets a large share of the blame. Not Fleury, not MacInnis or Suter, not even Nieuwendyk. If Vernon wins just one of those first round series from 1990-'94 we view him differently.

But Fleury isn't to blame, he poured his guts out.

His career wasn't too shabby and for those that compare him to Mogilny I don't think it would have been too hard to decide who you wanted on your team at that time. Fleury would have been the unanimous choice. He wasn't like Mogilny, he was more consistent, a better leader and day in and day out did what it took to win. Mogilny had one year of that, got a fat contract and then coasted. Fleury didn't.

He has a good enough stat line to get in as well. 1088 points in 1084 games. 455 goals. Finished 6th, 7th and 8th in points as his highest. Finished 2nd in goals at his highest. Always was picked for Team Canada - always. He deserves a long look, but it might take time.

vadim sharifijanov 06-27-2012 03:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big Phil (Post 51615177)
I think for Flames fans, historians or anyone who saw the games at that time you would think Fleury is the last person to blame for those failures. He racked up a healthy spread of points, even in those first round losses. No one should blame Fleury for those failures. Rightfully so, this is a lull in Vernon's career that is what has kept him from the HHOF so far. From an observational point of view Vernon gets a large share of the blame. Not Fleury, not MacInnis or Suter, not even Nieuwendyk. If Vernon wins just one of those first round series from 1990-'94 we view him differently.

But Fleury isn't to blame, he poured his guts out.

His career wasn't too shabby and for those that compare him to Mogilny I don't think it would have been too hard to decide who you wanted on your team at that time. Fleury would have been the unanimous choice. He wasn't like Mogilny, he was more consistent, a better leader and day in and day out did what it took to win. Mogilny had one year of that, got a fat contract and then coasted. Fleury didn't.

He has a good enough stat line to get in as well. 1088 points in 1084 games. 455 goals. Finished 6th, 7th and 8th in points as his highest. Finished 2nd in goals at his highest. Always was picked for Team Canada - always. He deserves a long look, but it might take time.

that's a huge point, and it's probably a sign that he has a better than decent shot of getting in someday.

not counting his rookie year with the flames and his few months with the avalanche, he never made it out of the first round. not once. and yet when you ask people in and around the league about fleury, one of the first things out of their mouths will be, "big game player." both gretzky and quinn called fleury the best big game player in the league when talking about picking him for the 2002 canadian olympic team, and messier has said similar things about him. these are the guys who beat fleury in the first round every year.

those names, of course, also constitute the old boys network that by and large still hold the keys to the HHOF. if "classy" got nieuwendyk into the hall, i have to think "big game player" will someday do the same for fleury.

Big Phil 06-27-2012 03:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vadim sharifijanov (Post 51616527)
that's a huge point, and it's probably a sign that he has a better than decent shot of getting in someday.

not counting his rookie year with the flames and his few months with the avalanche, he never made it out of the first round. not once. and yet when you ask people in and around the league about fleury, one of the first things out of their mouths will be, "big game player." both gretzky and quinn called fleury the best big game player in the league when talking about picking him for the 2002 canadian olympic team, and messier has said similar things about him. these are the guys who beat fleury in the first round every year.

those names, of course, also constitute the old boys network that by and large still hold the keys to the HHOF. if "classy" got nieuwendyk into the hall, i have to think "big game player" will someday do the same for fleury.

Well, here's what bothers me. Nieuwendyk gets in on his second try. Fleury, the superior player, is still waiting. It shows you the power these guys yield, and its a little scary when you think of it.

TheMoreYouKnow 06-27-2012 04:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big Phil (Post 51617589)
Well, here's what bothers me. Nieuwendyk gets in on his second try. Fleury, the superior player, is still waiting. It shows you the power these guys yield, and its a little scary when you think of it.

Well to be fair they hold the keys to a hockey museum/club and not nuclear weapons so it's really not that scary.

IggyFan12 06-27-2012 04:38 PM

If you look at the Flames teams of the early 90's there is no way they should have not won a playoff series until 2004! And Fleury was the best player on most of those teams, yes he played very well but he couldn't get the job done.

Fleury has upset alot of people in hockey, there is a reason why his jersey isn't retired in Calgary (I don't agree with it but it's a fact). Based on on ice only, he should be in, but I'm not holding my breathe.

Big Phil 06-27-2012 07:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IggyFan12 (Post 51621383)
If you look at the Flames teams of the early 90's there is no way they should have not won a playoff series until 2004! And Fleury was the best player on most of those teams, yes he played very well but he couldn't get the job done.

Fleury has upset alot of people in hockey, there is a reason why his jersey isn't retired in Calgary (I don't agree with it but it's a fact). Based on on ice only, he should be in, but I'm not holding my breathe.

I think we should anaylze Fleury's contributions to those first round losses.

1990 - 5 points in 6 games. He was a sophomore and the Flames were the best team in the NHL that year and should have never lost. A number of people to blame before Fleury

1991 - 7 points in 7 games. Scored three points in Game 7. Scored the overtime winner in Game 6. Not sure how much you can blame him for Vernon laying another egg in Game 7

1992 - no postseason

1993 - 12 points in 6 games. Scored 3 points in the deciding 6th game. Had a point in every single game. Not much more he could do.

1994 - 10 points in 7 games. Scored 2 goals in Game 7.

1995 - 14 points in 7 games. Had a 5 and 4 point game.

1996 - 3 points in 4 games. no longer favoured to win, losing to the Hawks.

You can tell Fleury poured his heart out in those series. It would be nice to have seen him get out of the first round, but when you analyze his track record you can see that while you can't reward him for playoff rounds he never played in, you also can't point the finger at him for the losses. Big difference compared to a guy like Tkachuk who rarely elevated his game at the important times. A guy like him you can penalize, Fleury you can't.

Hobnobs 06-27-2012 07:36 PM

If it wasnt for Fleurys off-ice behaviour Im pretty sure he would be consideration. Im not against him in HoF either. Hes one of the most memorable players of the 90s (both for the right and wrong reasons).

Ed Wood 06-27-2012 07:49 PM

I'm hoping he gets in but it's going to take some time if he makes it at all. I tend to give extra credit to guys who were truly exciting to watch. Fleury certainly qualifies there while a guy like Dave Andreychuk doesn't.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:43 AM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.