HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   The History of Hockey (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=126)
-   -   Argument against Andreychuk (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=141912)

Big Phil 05-04-2005 06:12 PM

Argument against Andreychuk
 
Okay there have been some Hall of Fame debates recently. My question is as to why Dave Andreychuk is considered a Hall of Famer by some. Why is that? He has played in the NHL 22 seasons. He has never hit 100 points. He hit 99 in '93 and '94 while playing with Gilmour. Other than that just 91 once in '91-92. Yes he has over 600 goals. But his PPG over his career is not Hall worthy by any means. Maybe for an offensive defenseman. He had 52 goals, and 53. After that never over 41. He was never named to any year end all-star teams as well. He may have won a Cup but look at his career playoff numbers. They are rotten. No offense but they just dont measure up.

He may be the leader of all time in power play goals but that is mainly because he needed that man advantage to score half the time. I dont think there was anytime when Andreychuk was thought of as one of the Top 25 players in the game, een in his prime in '93. To me is that Hall material.

Put it this way I like Andreychuk, but if he retired in '96 would he be Hall worhty? No. To put it in another light would Francis be in the Hall of Fame if he reitred at 33? I say yes.

Ogopogo* 05-04-2005 06:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big Phil
Okay there have been some Hall of Fame debates recently. My question is as to why Dave Andreychuk is considered a Hall of Famer by some. Why is that? He has played in the NHL 22 seasons. He has never hit 100 points. He hit 99 in '93 and '94 while playing with Gilmour. Other than that just 91 once in '91-92. Yes he has over 600 goals. But his PPG over his career is not Hall worthy by any means. Maybe for an offensive defenseman. He had 52 goals, and 53. After that never over 41. He was never named to any year end all-star teams as well. He may have won a Cup but look at his career playoff numbers. They are rotten. No offense but they just dont measure up.

He may be the leader of all time in power play goals but that is mainly because he needed that man advantage to score half the time. I dont think there was anytime when Andreychuk was thought of as one of the Top 25 players in the game, een in his prime in '93. To me is that Hall material.

Put it this way I like Andreychuk, but if he retired in '96 would he be Hall worhty? No. To put it in another light would Francis be in the Hall of Fame if he reitred at 33? I say yes.

Neither Andreychuk nor Francis should be in the hall. They are classic cases of players fattening their stats by playing a long time during an offensive era. Neither man dominated. Neither man won scoring titles or awards. Neither LED a team to the cup.

Excellent players, not hall of famers.

Big Phil 05-04-2005 06:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ogopogo
Neither Andreychuk nor Francis should be in the hall. They are classic cases of players fattening their stats by playing a long time during an offensive era. Neither man dominated. Neither man won scoring titles or awards. Neither LED a team to the cup.

Excellent players, not hall of famers.

Yeah but Francis had won two Cups and had over 100 points three times. And some in the 90s even on the Hartford Whalers. He may have only won the Selke as an award in '95 but he was in the Gretzky or Lemieux era when they came first as centers. Who's gonna be named 1st team all-star when Gretzky is there all the time?

Sotnos 05-04-2005 06:22 PM

I'm not getting in to this one for the umpteenth time. :shakehead
Quote:

Originally Posted by Ogopogo
Neither LED a team to the cup.

I really hope you're kidding in Andreychuk's case. If not, then you apparently have no idea about his contribution to Tampa.

Ogopogo* 05-04-2005 06:27 PM

You have to put Francis' 100 point seasons in perspective. When he scored 101 for the Whalers, 10th place in NHL scoring was 102 points. When he scored 100 for Pittsburgh in 92-93, 10 place in scoring was 123. So he was buried behind a lot of other guys. Those seasons had great offense league wide and Francis rode the wave. He did not lead the wave, otherwise he would have been a top 10 scorer. These 100 point seasons are the equivalent of getting 14 points in 24 games during the 1924 season, 52 points in 50 games during the 1945 season or 78 points in 82 games during the 1998 season. The era must be considered to put his numbers into perspective.

Of his 3 100 point seasons only the 119 points in 1995-96 was exceptional because he finished 4th in the league.

Ogopogo* 05-04-2005 06:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sotnos
I'm not getting in to this one for the umpteenth time. :shakehead

I really hope you're kidding in Andreychuk's case. If not, then you apparently have no idea about his contribution to Tampa.

His contribution was far less than Brad Richards as the Conn Smythe trophy tells us. I would also say that Lecavalier and a few others contributed far more than Andreychuk as well.

c-carp 05-04-2005 06:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big Phil
Okay there have been some Hall of Fame debates recently. My question is as to why Dave Andreychuk is considered a Hall of Famer by some. Why is that? He has played in the NHL 22 seasons. He has never hit 100 points. He hit 99 in '93 and '94 while playing with Gilmour. Other than that just 91 once in '91-92. Yes he has over 600 goals. But his PPG over his career is not Hall worthy by any means. Maybe for an offensive defenseman. He had 52 goals, and 53. After that never over 41. He was never named to any year end all-star teams as well. He may have won a Cup but look at his career playoff numbers. They are rotten. No offense but they just dont measure up.

He may be the leader of all time in power play goals but that is mainly because he needed that man advantage to score half the time. I dont think there was anytime when Andreychuk was thought of as one of the Top 25 players in the game, een in his prime in '93. To me is that Hall material.

Put it this way I like Andreychuk, but if he retired in '96 would he be Hall worhty? No. To put it in another light would Francis be in the Hall of Fame if he reitred at 33? I say yes.

I look at Andrychuk much like I look at Mike Gartner. I think both are HOF players. Gartner never scored over 50 goals but to me 700 is 700 and with Andrychuk 600 is 600. Just my 2 cents.

Ogopogo* 05-04-2005 06:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by c-carp
I look at Andrychuk much like I look at Mike Gartner. I think both are HOF players. Gartner never scored over 50 goals but to me 700 is 700 and with Andrychuk 600 is 600. Just my 2 cents.

Is 700 really 700?

Gartner played 80 game seasons during a time when the NHL averaged up to 8 goals per game.

A guy like Cy Denneny had only 246 goals during his career but, I submit to you that he was far greater than Gartner or Andreychuk. He played 30 game seasons in a defensive era. Denneny was in the NHL's top 5 goal scorers 8 times during his career and that usually meant around 25 goals per season. Denneny also won a scoring title and finished 2nd four times.

So, based on that data, I would say that 700 is not 700 and 600 is not 600. Playing in the 20s, Gartner and Andreychuk would have scored about 150 goals each.

norrisnick 05-04-2005 06:45 PM

Andreychuk is a borderline case and Francis is definitely in. Having a solidly productive 20+ year career is just as great as burning out after 5 great years.

Hockey Outsider 05-04-2005 06:47 PM

I agree with Ogopogo and Big Phil: Andreychuk was a very good player for a long time, but does not deserve to be in the Hall of Fame.

1) Andreychuk never won any major personal awards despite playing for more than two decades.

2) Andreychuk was among the league leaders in goals only twice (9th in 1993 and 4th in 1994) and points only once (9th in 1994). This is not the mark of a dominant scorer.

3) The fact that he is the all-time leader in powerplay goal-scoring isn't overly impressive. A goal is a goal, is it not? (Never mind the fact that he played in a high-scoring, high-powerplay era)

4) I don't think Andreychuk's "intangibles" are sufficient to raise him to HOF level. Despite his relatively important role in last year's playoffs, historically, he has not been a great playoff performer (among other things, his points-per-game drops by 0.23 in the playoffs). He didn't learn how to play defense until late in his career.

5) The strongest point in favor of Andreychuk's induction is the fact that he scored 600 goals. Yes, this is a great accomplishment, but he's hung around at least 5 or 6 years past his prime scoring 20 goals per year to reach that goal. Five or six years ago, I never heard anyone argue in favor of his induction. I don't think that hanging around in the league (albeit as a good veteran 3rd liner) inflating your goals total is a sufficient reason to go to the Hall of Fame.

6) Will he make it in? Well, if Pulford and Gillies are in, anything can happen...

Sorry if that was a bit harsh. Andreychuk was a very good player for a long time and I was proud to see him raise the Cup over his head last year. But I definitely don't think he deserves to be in the HOF for the reasons I said.

revolverjgw 05-04-2005 06:52 PM

I don't think Andreychuk should make it. Even though I DO value longetivity and consistency when I consider guys for the HOF, he's still just a little short of the mark.

Francis is a no brainer. He put up lots of points even after the ''stat padding'' 80s/early 90s, put up top-line points for a LONG LONG time, even past his prime, and has a Selke. So he's been doing a lot more than scoring, for a very long time.

Rather Gingerly 1* 05-04-2005 06:52 PM

I think Francis will get in. Guys like Bernie Ferderko and Joey Mullen are in so Francis has to get consideration.

Andreychuk was never a great player just a good player who played much longer than most others

c-carp 05-04-2005 06:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rather Gingerly 1
I think Francis will get in. Guys like Bernie Ferderko and Joey Mullen are in so Francis has to get consideration.

Andreychuk was never a great player just a good player who played much longer than most others

Do you use Mullen and Federko as examples because you think that they shouldnt be in? I also think Ron Francis should be in.

c-carp 05-04-2005 06:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ogopogo
Is 700 really 700?

Gartner played 80 game seasons during a time when the NHL averaged up to 8 goals per game.

A guy like Cy Denneny had only 246 goals during his career but, I submit to you that he was far greater than Gartner or Andreychuk. He played 30 game seasons in a defensive era. Denneny was in the NHL's top 5 goal scorers 8 times during his career and that usually meant around 25 goals per season. Denneny also won a scoring title and finished 2nd four times.

So, based on that data, I would say that 700 is not 700 and 600 is not 600. Playing in the 20s, Gartner and Andreychuk would have scored about 150 goals each.

This arguement while always interesting is always one that produces varying opinions. I dont even know who Cy Dennehy is so it would be unfair for me to argue either way. based on your stats he should be in if he isnt already.

#66 05-04-2005 07:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by c-carp
This arguement while always interesting is always one that produces varying opinions. I dont even know who Cy Dennehy is so it would be unfair for me to argue either way. based on your stats he should be in if he isnt already.

Cy Dennehy was a great player of that era but don't be fooled by his stats. Star players in those days often played almost the entire game and stats from star players in that era almost always boggle the mind. The same goes for Bobrov and some other older Euro stars.

Ogopogo* 05-04-2005 07:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by #66
Cy Dennehy was a great player of that era but don't be fooled by his stats. Star players in those days often played almost the entire game and stats from star players in that era almost always boggle the mind. The same goes for Bobrov and some other older Euro stars.

?

Please explain.

Being the leading goal scorer in the league in 1923 is the same thing as being the leading goal scorer in the league in 1993. Every player in the league has to use the same rules each season. So, if you are the best goal scorer one year - you are the best goal scorer in the world. Rules don't affect anything, everybody has the same rules during the season that a guy led the way. The best in 1930 is the same as being the best in 2000.

sunb 05-04-2005 07:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ogopogo
?

Please explain.

Being the leading goal scorer in the league in 1923 is the same thing as being the leading goal scorer in the league in 1993. Every player in the league has to use the same rules each season. So, if you are the best goal scorer one year - you are the best goal scorer in the world. Rules don't affect anything, everybody has the same rules during the season that a guy led the way. The best in 1930 is the same as being the best in 2000.

But still there would only be 6 teams and realistically, 72 forwards competing (defensemen weren't allowed to be creative).

Ogopogo* 05-04-2005 07:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jovanovski = Norris
But still there would only be 6 teams and realistically, 72 forwards competing (defensemen weren't allowed to be creative).

If the leading goal scorer was based on a random draw or some kind of fluke, that would make sense. 1/72 is better odds than 1/360 but, this is based on skill and being the best in the world - not a random draw. There are no odds, if you are the best, you win. Suppose Donovan Bailey lined up against the other 7 fastest men in the 100 meters and won the gold - is that any better than if he lined up against #2, #3 and #4? He is still the fastest in the world and he beat the best competition there is. Adding extra guys that are not as good has no bearing on the outcome.

It really does not matter how many teams are in the league. With 6 teams there are the 72 best forwards in the world in the NHL and thousands outside the NHL. With a 30 team NHL there are the 360 best forwards in the league and thousands outside the league. It makes no difference. The best in the world is the best in the world. No matter how many teams are in the league stocking their rosters with mediocre players, if you are the best, you lead the league. If you are second best you are #2. The number of teams is completely irrelevant.

BwayBshirt 05-04-2005 07:50 PM

some of you sound like you would keep hank aaron out of the baseball HOF if you had a chance just because he never was oustanding for a period of time :shakehead

consistency and being healthy is a big deal to any HOF. andreychuk has been both of those. if you thought it was easy to score 20+ goals in a season nowadays, go ask luc robitaille in 2002-03.

and if you want to know what makes andreychuk "great", then how about calling him one of the best power forwards in nhl history or at the very least during his time? i'm sure if you talked to anyone over the last 20 years they'd put him in the top 10, if not top 5.

and lastly, why the hell would you bring up overall point total for a guy whose primary job it is to score goals? OBVIOUSLY assists are secondary. that's like bringing up point totals for a defensive specialist!

to those who suggest that he's not in the HOF, especially after what he's done in tampa bay helping to turn that franchise around...well, that's your opinion but my Lord you have high standards.

#66 05-04-2005 07:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ogopogo
?

Please explain.

Being the leading goal scorer in the league in 1923 is the same thing as being the leading goal scorer in the league in 1993. Every player in the league has to use the same rules each season. So, if you are the best goal scorer one year - you are the best goal scorer in the world. Rules don't affect anything, everybody has the same rules during the season that a guy led the way. The best in 1930 is the same as being the best in 2000.

I wasn't talking about your stats. I was talking about the real point production of stars from that era. Joe Malone, Cy Dennehy, and others from that era played 60 min. a game. So Malones 44 goals in 20 games isn't as impressive as Espo's 76 goals in 78 games IMO.

silver_made* 05-04-2005 08:00 PM

are we talking about the same 'francis' that is ranked #4 all-time in points scored in NHL history. Um, yeah, he's getting into the HHOF. :dunce:

MS 05-04-2005 08:08 PM

Some peoples' HHOF standards are so high it's unreal. Ron Francis is a shoe-in, first-ballot HHOFer, guaranteed. And he should be. #4 in all-time NHL scoring, #2 all-time in assists. Led the league in assists twice, won two Stanley Cups. 3 Lady Byngs and a Selke. Even adjusting for the era, he's one of the greatest playmakers the game has ever seen. If you pro-rate the lockout year, he had over 50 assists 17 times, and over 60 assists 10 times. Plus he continued his excellence in the the low-scoring recent era. 3rd in NHL in assists, top-10 in scoring in 2002 at age 39. How anyone can question his induction is beyond me.

As for Andreychuk, he's one of the toughest calls ever. Same with Ciccarelli, although Ciccarelli doesn't have a Cup or the PPG record. I wouldn't complain if he got in, wouldn't be shocked if he didn't. If a guy with 600 goals makes the HHOF, it's hardly the travesty some people here would like to make it out to be.

And it's not like other halls of fame don't honour these type of longevity guy either. The baseball HHOF, which is held up as a shining example by people who think the hockey HHOF is too soft, has no problem inducting guys like Eddie Murray, who rarely led MLB in anything and had 0 MVPs, but turned 20+ years of 30 HR, 90 RBI play into 3000 hits and 500 HR.

reckoning 05-04-2005 08:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ogopogo
?

Please explain.

Being the leading goal scorer in the league in 1923 is the same thing as being the leading goal scorer in the league in 1993. Every player in the league has to use the same rules each season. So, if you are the best goal scorer one year - you are the best goal scorer in the world. Rules don't affect anything, everybody has the same rules during the season that a guy led the way. The best in 1930 is the same as being the best in 2000.

Some years are worth more than others. For example in the 1910s and 1920s several of the games top stars were in the PCHA, in the mid-1940s lots of players were serving in World War II, in the 1970s the WHA took away some of the talent. There are always other factors.

If the NHL came back with replacement players, I don`t think winning a scoring title there would be considered equal to the past seasons.

God Bless Canada 05-04-2005 09:14 PM

Andreychuk's a really close call. On one hand, he has 600 goals and over 1,300 points. On the other hand, he never was considered an elite (top five) player at his position. Not only that, but his PPG in his prime wasn't that impressive. (It's not like Doug Gilmour, who finished under a PPG, but only because he played so friggin' long).

The difference between Gartner and Andreychuk is what Gartner did (30 goals in his first 15 seasons) is something truly remarkable, which may never be equaled. Andreychuk

One thing that will be considered: Andreychuk (and to a lesser degree Tim Taylor) meant as much as anyone to Tampa's Cup run and recent success. Tampa's locker room was a disaster before they arrived. They brought cohesion and unity, organizing team-wide events. Andreychuk played peacemaker last year when Lecavalier and Tortorella were feuding. There is no way the Lightning win the Cup without Andreychuk and Taylor's leadership. In my opinion, there hasn't been a better leader in the game the last two years than Andreychuk.

If he gets in, it will take several tries, like Bill Barber. It will also be because (likely) our last memories of him were so good, and the work he did in transforming Tampa's locker room.

This is the first time in my life I've heard someone suggest Francis isn't a future HHOFer. I hope it's the last. Guess what? He's a sure fire first-ballot guy. He's fourth in all-time scoring. He was over a point-per-game even in seasons where they scored under six goals a game. He was hovering around a point per game in his late 30s on a defensive-minded Carolina team. He's also one of the best defensive forwards I've ever seen, is easily one of the top defensive forwards among the top 50 scorers. He was one of the best ever in the faceoff circle. He was a great leader. And, if it means anything, I have never seen a forward who can quarterback a PP like Ron Francis.[/FONT][/FONT]

Bergeron47 05-04-2005 09:48 PM

I found your first 2 points extremely weak:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hockey Outsider
1) Andreychuk never won any major personal awards despite playing for more than two decades.

Then I guess Gilbert Perreault, Dale Howerchuk, Alex Delvecchio, Norm Ullman, Peter Stastny, Michel Goulet, Darryl Sittler, Jari Kurri, Bert Olmstead & Steve Shutt shouldnt be in the Hall of Fame by your logic.. Oh, but a few of them have Calders, so I guess thats their ticket in, right?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hockey Outsider
2) Andreychuk was among the league leaders in goals only twice (9th in 1993 and 4th in 1994) and points only once (9th in 1994). This is not the mark of a dominant scorer.

What did you expect? Who did in the 80s and early 90s besides Lemieux and Gretzky?


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:15 PM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.