View Single Post
12-11-2012, 08:40 PM
Big Phil
Registered User
Big Phil's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,758
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
2 things here,

1) How are the players 50% at fault for either lockout?

Especially this current one? Unless you think players should just hand in a signed blank contract and let the owners fill in the details your assertion is absurd.

2) there are quite a few cases where current HHOF players might not be in if they miss 2 of their potential top seasons or prime or even just counting stats.

The cream of the crop or "1st ballot HHOFamer" (a really lousy rip off from baseball and not even applicable to hockey) get in reguardelss but most HHOF inductees are in for a full body of work.

The current group affected by the lockout will need to get some consideration, no doubt like WW2 guys did.
Well, I don't want this thread to turn into another lockout debate, but when neither side can come to an agreement both sides are at fault. The players chose a guy with a track record (Fehr) that reads like the obituaries if you remember the work stoppages in baseball. In recent days the players have ticked off who can be labelled "moderate owners" on the other side. So yeah, they are their own worst enemy, just like the owners. Both sides make my stomach churn.

As for the WW2 players. I can see only three guys to discuss here. Laprade, who is a horrible selection with or without the War. Then there is Bobby Bauer and Woody Dumart. I think Dumart had a long enough career coupled with a decent peak to just sneak in anyway. Bauer didn't play long, but was top 10 in points three times and a 2nd team all-star 4 times while being part of the famous Kraut line, like Dumart. The abscence of the War (three years) hurts him for sure. So really these are the guys we are talking about. One of them doesn't deserve it either way and the others had some pretty good peak seasons. But that's it. There aren't really any other "borderline" picks in that time frame.

And yes, there are many players where if you take their best two seasons out of the equation they are not Hall of Famers. Take Darryl Sittler for example. Let's pretend his best two years are gone. It would be hard to make him a HHOFer. But so what? I can probably name 25 guys in that same situation. Again, we actually SAW what Sittler could do in his best year (1978). He actually did it. He wasn't complaining and moaning on Twitter all day because of a lockout. We can reward him simply because he actually accomplished enough for a HHOF career. If Alfredsson or Elias or anyone else end up being players that don't make it and we look at the "what if there was no lockout scenario" then too bad. They don't get in, that's life.

Have we not had some marginal selections in the last 10 years? Do we need more just because in order to induct a few fan favourites we need to lower the bar based on the assumption (highlight that word) that they might have had a great season? Sorry. A guy like Alfredsson has been his own worst enemy here. Saying silly things like advising against a vote from the players is just another thing that will prolong these guys playing hockey. That doesn't help your HHOF status either by collecting dust at home.

Big Phil is offline   Reply With Quote