Argument for Oates
View Single Post
05-14-2005, 06:40 PM
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Then and there
Originally Posted by
If he continues his high quality of play....
From the past you could argue the merits of players like Craig Ludwig, Mark Howe or Kevin Lowe. I'm not saying these guys are all HHOF worthy, but their contributions to the game and their teams is not insignificant, yet your criteria would render them irrelevant.
At the very least each player should have his merits looked at on an individual basis. I don't think its fair to toss out anyone based on awards or all-star nominations since those have been heavily weighted to reward offensive players for 20 years with the exception of the Selke Trophy. If reasons can then be found why these gentlemen or others are not worthy let it be decided then, not before they even enter the discussion.
Well, Mark Howe meets the criteria easily, so no argument there.
Judgement on Foote must be left for later, since his career isn't over yet.
Although Foote and Lowe were/are integral parts of their team's success, but one has to wonder why they never were in the post-season All-Stars, considering that comparable players like Vladimir Konstantinov and Derian Hatcher have been.
And my suggested criteria doesn't rule anybody out even if they weren't considered among the very best in any of their playing seasons. They can still be selected, they just come under closer inspection with the "1 player in a decade exception".
As for Selke, maybe it could be taken into account in some way, but no way every 1-time Selke winner should be eligible for Hall. Maybe triple winners...
Last edited by gary69: 05-14-2005 at
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by gary69