Thread: Pavel Bure
View Single Post
Old
11-20-2003, 07:06 PM
  #30
Arastiroth
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Manhattan
Country: United States
Posts: 1,405
vCash: 500
If the HHOF should induct based on many seasons of excellence then shouldn't Orr not be in the hall of fame? I know Orr is many times better then Bure, but Orr still played less games then Bure, yet everyone would consider him a no brainer for the Hall (which I agree with). The Hall of Fame, in my opinion, should represent the greats of hockey. If they have a relatively short career (although Bure still played 11 years), as long as they dominate their position, I see no reason why not to induct them. He's turning 33 in March. It isn't like he was 28 or something. And before anyone says he still needs to play a few more years, Orr was inducted based on what he did by the time he turned 27. He didn't retire until 4 years later, but he only played 36 games in those 4 years, so it wasn't like he was really contributing to his legacy at that point.

And yes, I know Orr changed the way defensemen play and revolutionized the game, and while Bure didn't really revolutionize his position, he still was the best goal scorer of his era, and, is one of the best goal scorers of all-time, easily. I think that 11 years of productivity at his level is good enough to get in. Maybe not the first ballot, but I think a couple years later he should.

Arastiroth is offline