Creating our own Hall of Fame?
View Single Post
11-09-2010, 04:10 PM
Join Date: Oct 2005
Originally Posted by
Let's say there are two shoo-ins (Lemieux, Mikita) plus Thompson, Yakushev, and Dave Keon. I bet Keon gets in simply because everyone has a third vote and would feel obligated to use, and Keon is just barely a step ahead of the other two.
Alternatively, the two seasons surrounding the lockout saw the last games of Francis, Hull, Larionov, Leetch, Lemieux, MacInnis, Messier, Oates, Robitaille, Stevens, and Yzerman. If we are capping inductions at 3, and kicking candidates out of the pool after rejection, we're going to be in some trouble getting all the qualified candidates in.
I like the idea of reviewing the candidates chronologically, but the timeline should not restrict eligibility. Likewise, the voters shouldn't be artificially influenced into choosing a certain number of inductees. For that reason I suggest having no minimum or maximum. If the consensus is that someone is qualified, he is qualified. If consensus is that he is not, he is not. If we're doing this the right way, over-inclusivity should not be a problem.
It's actually the votes that are "capped" -- thus that "cap" effects the maximum number of inductions.
And if we're going this way, the players will obviously be eligible for more than a round.
But you raise a point very valid point, though...
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by MXD