HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   The History of Hockey (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=126)
-   -   Does anyone defend Clark Gillies' HOF entrance? (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=144489)

Big Phil 05-27-2005 01:38 PM

Does anyone defend Clark Gillies' HOF entrance?
 
Of all of the guys who are in the Hockey Hall of Fame I'd have to say Clark Gillies is the most talked about on these boards as to who should not be there. Does anyone think he is well-deserved to be in there? Or does everyone on the Planet think he should never have gotten in at all?

His stats:

Top point seasons - 91, 85, 78, 77.
Top goal seasons - 38, 35, 35, 34

Four Cups

First Team all-star in '78, '79 (they looked to be slow years for left wingers)

Has 697 career points in 958 games good for a PPG average of 0.72 and his playoff PPG is 0.57

I personally have no clue how he got into the Hall of Fame with all due respect to him. Is it not supposed to be a shrine of greatness? Clark Gillies was not great by any means. I dont know any opinions?

LadyByngJeanRatelle 05-27-2005 01:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big Phil
Of all of the guys who are in the Hockey Hall of Fame I'd have to say Clark Gillies is the most talked about on these boards as to who should not be there. Does anyone think he is well-deserved to be in there? Or does everyone on the Planet think he should never have gotten in at all?

His stats:

Top point seasons - 91, 85, 78, 77.
Top goal seasons - 38, 35, 35, 34

Four Cups

First Team all-star in '78, '79 (they looked to be slow years for left wingers)

Has 697 career points in 958 games good for a PPG average of 0.72 and his playoff PPG is 0.57

I personally have no clue how he got into the Hall of Fame with all due respect to him. Is it not supposed to be a shrine of greatness? Clark Gillies was not great by any means. I dont know any opinions?

If Gillies is in the Hall, how can Cam "C-Bass" Neely not be there??

Chili 05-27-2005 02:05 PM

You could do a poll vote (i.e. Clark Gillies, Hall of famer, yes or no?).

My answer would be no. I'm not an Islander's fan so maybe one could sing his praises.

I'll throw out a somewhat similiar player, in my opinion...Is Rick Tocchet hall of fame worthy?

NYIsles1* 05-27-2005 02:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big Phil
Of all of the guys who are in the Hockey Hall of Fame I'd have to say Clark Gillies is the most talked about on these boards as to who should not be there. Does anyone think he is well-deserved to be in there? Or does everyone on the Planet think he should never have gotten in at all?

His stats:

Top point seasons - 91, 85, 78, 77.
Top goal seasons - 38, 35, 35, 34

Four Cups

First Team all-star in '78, '79 (they looked to be slow years for left wingers)

Has 697 career points in 958 games good for a PPG average of 0.72 and his playoff PPG is 0.57

I personally have no clue how he got into the Hall of Fame with all due respect to him. Is it not supposed to be a shrine of greatness? Clark Gillies was not great by any means. I dont know any opinions?

Four straight cups, five straight finals appeareances, ninteen straight playoff wins, nine out of ten years in a row going at least as far as the semi-finals.

The argument for Gillies goes beyond statistics and to what the Islanders accomplished as a team because of his impact on a game.

Big Phil 05-27-2005 02:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYIsles1
Four straight cups, five straight finals appeareances, ninteen straight playoff wins, nine out of ten years in a row going at least as far as the semi-finals.

The argument for Gillies goes beyond statistics and to what the Islanders accomplished as a team because of his impact on a game.

Yeah but it for sure wasnt all Gillies. He was just on a bunch of Cup winning teams if he was a Leaf they wouldnt even flinch at him. The Conn Smythe Trophy winners for the four straight years are: Trottier, Goring, Bossy, Smith. Gillies isnt even near that. I'd put Butch Goring in the Hall of Fame over Gillies. And Goring isnt near Hall worhty to me although he was the last missing puzzle for that dynasty.

Slats432 05-27-2005 02:20 PM

The contributions of all players aren't in the stats.

Gilles was a giant, and had skill. He was a power forward before the phrase was coined.

His contribution to one of the best lines ever to play is something that is hall of fame worthy.

He could do it all. Fight, hit, score....

I prefer Gilles being in the Hall of Fame to our(Edmonton's) own Grant Fuhr being there.

KOVALEV10* 05-27-2005 02:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by slats432
The contributions of all players aren't in the stats.

Gilles was a giant, and had skill. He was a power forward before the phrase was coined.

His contribution to one of the best lines ever to play is something that is hall of fame worthy.

He could do it all. Fight, hit, score....

I prefer Gilles being in the Hall of Fame to our(Edmonton's) own Grant Fuhr being there.

Why isnt Carbonneau in then? Carbonneau was clearly the much better defensive player and could also score too. What about Neely.

Big Phil 05-27-2005 02:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by slats432
The contributions of all players aren't in the stats.

Gilles was a giant, and had skill. He was a power forward before the phrase was coined.

His contribution to one of the best lines ever to play is something that is hall of fame worthy.

He could do it all. Fight, hit, score....

I prefer Gilles being in the Hall of Fame to our(Edmonton's) own Grant Fuhr being there.

Gilles over Gratn Fuhr? Okay now I've heard everything! Fuhr is in there ahead of Gilles that's for sure. He won a Vezina Trophy in '88. And minus the 5 Cups he won with Edmonton, take a look at his stellar clutch play in the '87 Canada Cup vs. the Soviets. When the game is on the line you wanted Fuhr in net. Gilles was just a good player thats it. Bourne, Goring, Tonelli were also good on those teams. I'd take Tonelli over Gilles.

Slats432 05-27-2005 02:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big Phil
Gilles over Gratn Fuhr? Okay now I've heard everything! Fuhr is in there ahead of Gilles that's for sure. He won a Vezina Trophy in '88. And minus the 5 Cups he won with Edmonton, take a look at his stellar clutch play in the '87 Canada Cup vs. the Soviets. When the game is on the line you wanted Fuhr in net. Gilles was just a good player thats it. Bourne, Goring, Tonelli were also good on those teams. I'd take Tonelli over Gilles.

As an Oiler fan, I always have to defend my position on Grant Fuhr. He wasn't that great a goalie in my mind. The offense on the team could come back from any number of bad goals that Fuhr could give up.

The best thing that Fuhr could do is give you a big save at a great time, but he would give up two bad goals and the make a huge save when it was 4-4.

To me, he wasn't even the best goalie in his draft year. If Vernon or Vanbiesbrouck were drafted by the Oilers they would have better numbers and the same amount of cups.

Trottier 05-27-2005 02:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big Phil
He [Gillies] was just on a bunch of Cup winning teams...

You have got to be kidding with that comment.

Yep, ol' Jethro was just riding the coattails all those years, a bit contributor. ;)

One can make a fairly solid case why Gillies doesn't belong in the HOF; I personally don't feel strongly one way or another (more in a second).

However, bringing up his offensive stats and suggesting that he was just another player on that team or leaguewide, for that matter, is about as weak a case as one can present.

As for condeming his election: The HOF is a building with four walls that celebrates hockey's many top players, of varying levels of greatness, nothing more. The reverence in which some treat it is overblown, IMO. No one is going to confuse Clark Gillies with Gordie Howe. And, again, a case can be made that his selection was a reach; clearly he is borderline. (And Butch Goring doesn't deserve to be anywhere near the HOF; what next, Rod Brind'amour?)

But to belittle Gillies' impact on the game in his time - by simply relying on numbers - and on one of the greatest teams in the history of the sport, is terribly short-sighted.

Just my opinion.

Dr Love 05-27-2005 03:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LadyByngJeanRatelle
If Gillies is in the Hall, how can Cam "C-Bass" Neely not be there??

Easy: because "if X is in there, why isn't Y" is a terrible argument. In every HOF there are players that shouldn't be there. Just because a player is better than someone in there isn't a valid reason for putting them in, they need to be worthy of it of their own merit.

MS 05-27-2005 03:12 PM

Gillies' career is nearly identical to Kevin Stevens'. Nearly identical career totals, very similar all-star resume. Both had one season where they were top-10 in scoring (although Stevens' was #2 in scoring in 91-92 while Gillies was only 10th in 1978-79). Both only had 5 really solid seasons, both were key members of multiple Cup-winning teams, both were elite power forwards in their prime, both flamed out at an early age. Both were the co-#1 LW in the league for a couple seasons - Gillies with Steve Shutt, Stevens with Luc Robitaille. Excellent players, but neither has an HHOF resume.

Cam Neely was more dominant in his best years than Gillies, has more all-star nods than Gillies, and has better career numbers than Gillies despite his injuries (including more playoff goals), yet isn't in the HHOF.

Ogopogo* 05-27-2005 03:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by slats432
As an Oiler fan, I always have to defend my position on Grant Fuhr. He wasn't that great a goalie in my mind. The offense on the team could come back from any number of bad goals that Fuhr could give up.

The best thing that Fuhr could do is give you a big save at a great time, but he would give up two bad goals and the make a huge save when it was 4-4.

To me, he wasn't even the best goalie in his draft year. If Vernon or Vanbiesbrouck were drafted by the Oilers they would have better numbers and the same amount of cups.

You kidding me?

Fuhr won a Vezina and was a Vezina runner up. The GMs recognized his greatness but, many people just look at stats and think that tells the story. Goaltending stats are nearly worthless to judge how good a goaltender is.

Fuhr faced breakaways, two on ones, three on ones, point blank shots and he played brilliantly. No other goalie faced the kind of shots Fuhr faced - well, except for the Nordiques, Devils and Penguins goalies of the 80s. Fuhr was fantastic. Put him on Montreal and Patrick Roy would never have gotten the starting job.

Ogopogo* 05-27-2005 03:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MS
Gillies' career is nearly identical to Kevin Stevens'. Nearly identical career totals, very similar all-star resume. Both had one season where they were top-10 in scoring (although Stevens' was #2 in scoring in 91-92 while Gillies was only 10th in 1978-79). Both only had 5 really solid seasons, both were key members of multiple Cup-winning teams, both were elite power forwards in their prime, both flamed out at an early age. Both were the co-#1 LW in the league for a couple seasons - Gillies with Steve Shutt, Stevens with Luc Robitaille. Excellent players, but neither has an HHOF resume.

Cam Neely was more dominant in his best years than Gillies, has more all-star nods than Gillies, and has better career numbers than Gillies despite his injuries (including more playoff goals), yet isn't in the HHOF.

#2 is a LOT more impressive than #10 in scoring. But, neither of them is worthy of Hall status, IMO.

Slats432 05-27-2005 03:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ogopogo
You kidding me?

Fuhr won a Vezina and was a Vezina runner up. The GMs recognized his greatness but, many people just look at stats and think that tells the story. Goaltending stats are nearly worthless to judge how good a goaltender is.

Fuhr faced breakaways, two on ones, three on ones, point blank shots and he played brilliantly. No other goalie faced the kind of shots Fuhr faced - well, except for the Nordiques, Devils and Penguins goalies of the 80s. Fuhr was fantastic. Put him on Montreal and Patrick Roy would never have gotten the starting job.

I watched him play almost every game in Edmonton. I was never truly that impressed. Sure there were quality chances, but Fuhr gave up tons of softies.

Many people make a case for Fuhr, and that is fine, we can agree to disagree. I think his career benefited from being on the Oilers more than the Oilers benefited from having him.

Anyways....I am getting off topic.

Gilles = :thumbu:

ClassicHockey 05-27-2005 04:00 PM

Clark Gillies
 
I'm another one that doesn't think Clarke Gillies should have been in. But I base that opinion on my own selection criteria. I don't know what criteria the selection committee use. They may not go by criteria like scoring, Stanley Cups, awards, length of career.

Also, maybe in Toronto where I am from, Gillies doesn't impress as a particularly good candidate. But, in the New York area, from their point of view, Gillies is deserving. That is one explanation that I was given. It makes some sense to me that other regions have different perceptions and they are just as valuable as another area's perceptions.

What are the criteria that should be used?


Quote:

Originally Posted by Dr Love
Easy: because "if X is in there, why isn't Y" is a terrible argument. In every HOF there are players that shouldn't be there. Just because a player is better than someone in there isn't a valid reason for putting them in, they need to be worthy of it of their own merit.


Malefic74 05-27-2005 04:12 PM

The argument for Gilies is an uphill one to be sure. Was a good player? Absolutely. A big key to the Isles dominance? No question. Is he the only "forgotten" one of those great teams? No.

I don't think Gillies is at the level of the HHOF, but I can understand his selection over Bernie Federko who won absolutely nothing and did little but rack up points on a pretty mediocre Blues team.

As for other forgotten Isles who I think had contributions as great or greater than GIllies... Tonelli is one, Goring another, but my vote for underappreciated Islander of those teams is Ken Morrow. Rock solid shutdown defencemen who drove me nuts whenever the Habs played the Isles. Probably doesn't get the attention because he partnered with Potvin a fair bit.

KH1 05-27-2005 09:34 PM

The Islanders dynasty as a whole is underrated. Many players (Gillies, Tonelli, Goring, Morrow, Sutter) would be remembered in much higher esteem if they played on Toronto, for example. Even Mike Bossy, Bryan Trottier and Denis Potvin are often forgotten slightly (see the NHL 2Night "experts" top 100 players that left out Trottier.)

Gillies is a real borderline hall of famer, but you can't make the arguement simply on stats. He was at times the glue that held the team together. He fought, scored, passed, defended--basically he did everything well. Maybe not one thing well enough to be in the HoF, but as Trottier said he certainly isn't worthy of ridicule.

reckoning 05-27-2005 10:25 PM

That`s the thing; it`s very unfortunate that since his induction the only time Gillies gets mentioned is when people ridicule his Hall of Fame selection.

God Bless Canada 05-28-2005 02:17 AM

I have a really hard time saying anything bad about a strong power forward who won four Cups and got two post-season all-stars selections. That's four more Cups than any of us will ever own.

But those four Cups are the reason he's in. To me, Glenn Anderson is more deserving of enshrinement, and I don't think Anderson's good enough, either. Gillies' best offensive seasons came before he won a Cup.

He was a heck of a player. He was an important part, but not one of the five best players, on one of the greatest teams in NHL history. He wasn't Trottier, Bossy, Potvin, Smith, or even Tonelli or Nystrom. He's not an HHOF player.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:04 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.