View Single Post
11-09-2012, 09:37 AM
Unregistered User
iamjs's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 9,513
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by zeus3007 View Post
None of the guys you mentioned had near the level of notoriety as Fleury. He was kicked out of the league for crying out loud. He won't make it.
and probably would have been reinstated had he applied sooner. When he received his 2nd substance-related suspension, Fleury had no intentions of returning to the NHL and was content playing senior league hockey with a few former NHL players. Fast forward to 2009 when Fleury was several years sober, and the league reinstated him four weeks after his request. They could have very easily said "look at your history. No deal."

I'm sure the multiple years of sobriety helped his case versus if he would have requested reinstatement after 3-4 months, but being "kicked out of the league" is more of a result of Fleury putting the suspension on a backburner. Had he not attempted a comeback, I'm convinced he'd still be "suspended" (using quotes on this because of Fleury's now-finished NHL career.)

Would I put Fleury in the HHOF? It might be a few years because of a number of players now retiring, but I would have no issue with him going in.

Originally Posted by I Hate Jay Feaster
These are the same people who set arbitrary and imagined criteria for players to make it in, like "1000 is HOF worthy" and argue for guys like Andreychuk, Recchi, and Verbeek.
I think the imaginary line was set when NHL seasons were only 70 games and your average Art Ross winner was only scoring 80-90 points per season.

iamjs is offline   Reply With Quote