Ha, knowing the NHL they'd probably admit him merely for the appearance of racial diversityl
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill_Crosby
Most places in Western society subscribe to this notion.
All kidding aside, part of what puts Modano and Sundin over the top is their respective REASONABLE (ie: at least debatable) claims to the title "Best American / Swedish forward ever." Obviously Iginla falls just a liiiiiiittle bit short of some of the best Canadians ever to play, but consider the Hall not just a place for the 10 best players of all-time to be enshrined but as a celebration of hockey and a snapshot of the game's history. Doesn't Iginla -- as the NHL's first black superstar -- get some bonus points in the "had a unique place in history" category?
I don't think he can retire today, but if he stopped being dominant today and did the standard bell-curve regression into mediocrity and then retired in ~5 years, I think he'd be a shoe-in.
In my opinion, it's a definate yes for Iginla. Personally I think people get too caught up in comparing current players with all time greats, something thats extremely subjective, whenever talk about HOF comes up. I take a much more practical approach, its as simple as reading the rules. Each year, X number of players are admitted to the HOF, after a 3 year wait after retirement. So effectively, X players per draft get admitted to the hall of fame. It's never going to work out exactly like that, as players retire at different ages and some drafts are better than others, but statistically its pretty accurate when viewing the big picture. Iginla was drafted in 95, so as of right now, here's the top of the class from the 94-96 drafts:
The NHL likes to put on a show with there HOF inductions, so I doubt they'd ever leave a spot empty. And looking at that group, if they take 3 per year, Iginla should be a lock, and you could likely see guys like Smyth or Savard going in with him.
The NHL likes to put on a show with there HOF inductions, so I doubt they'd ever leave a spot empty. And looking at that group, if they take 3 per year, Iginla should be a lock, and you could likely see guys like Smyth or Savard going in with him.
I extremely doubt that Marc Savard will make the HOF...and I'm a Bruins fan.
For HoF purposes, it probably is by quite a bit. By wikipedia's count, only 8 guys have ever done it (Richard, Bossy, Gretzky, Lemiuex, and Brett Hull all did it in their teams' first 50 games in a season, while Kurri, Mogilny, and Neely did it within their (but not their teams') first 50 games in a season). Not to belittle Iginla's awards, which are incredibly impressive, but Neely's inclusion on that list is more prestigious.
Given nearly every player on that list did so in the most watered down period of NHL history, it isnt nearly as prestigious as you think.
I would argue that 35+ goals in the past 10-12 years is equivalent to 50 in the 80s.
Neely's 50 in 49 was impressive, but I would take bets that there will not be another 50 in 50 player without a massive change in the game itself. You can't punish a guy based on what other players did in an era that simply is not comparable.
In my opinion, it's a definate yes for Iginla. Personally I think people get too caught up in comparing current players with all time greats, something thats extremely subjective, whenever talk about HOF comes up. I take a much more practical approach, its as simple as reading the rules. Each year, X number of players are admitted to the HOF, after a 3 year wait after retirement. So effectively, X players per draft get admitted to the hall of fame. It's never going to work out exactly like that, as players retire at different ages and some drafts are better than others, but statistically its pretty accurate when viewing the big picture. Iginla was drafted in 95, so as of right now, here's the top of the class from the 94-96 drafts:
The NHL likes to put on a show with there HOF inductions, so I doubt they'd ever leave a spot empty. And looking at that group, if they take 3 per year, Iginla should be a lock, and you could likely see guys like Smyth or Savard going in with him.
This is a very good/well stated argument as to why he should eventually get in but still leaves doubt as to whether he already has done enough.
Given nearly every player on that list did so in the most watered down period of NHL history, it isnt nearly as prestigious as you think.
I would argue that 35+ goals in the past 10-12 years is equivalent to 50 in the 80s.
Neely's 50 in 49 was impressive, but I would take bets that there will not be another 50 in 50 player without a massive change in the game itself. You can't punish a guy based on what other players did in an era that simply is not comparable.
In all fairness, Neely did that in 1993-94, a season that featured only slightly higher a goals-per-game average than 2005-06.
Given nearly every player on that list did so in the most watered down period of NHL history, it isnt nearly as prestigious as you think.
I would argue that 35+ goals in the past 10-12 years is equivalent to 50 in the 80s.
Neely's 50 in 49 was impressive, but I would take bets that there will not be another 50 in 50 player without a massive change in the game itself. You can't punish a guy based on what other players did in an era that simply is not comparable.
Not to mention 50 in 50 is more of a mythical accomplishment than anything else. If a player had an identical career to Neely and was an identical player but scored 50 goals in 51 games that season I should think he still gets in the hall. 50 in 50 is simply a nice round number.
I tend to disgress on this statement. I might be wrong, but what made Neely a bearable induction to mostly everyone is his 50 goals in-less-than 50 games season at the end of his career. No matter how dominant he was (during his prime), I don't think he gets in without that season... Or, at least, he would be a much more controversial induction than he is already.
So, in a sense, while Iggy is arguably ahead of Neely for his reg. season career, I don't think he's there yet considering his reg. season achievements, if that makes sense.
Once again, Iginla's overall numbers look weaker on the surface. While 50 in 49 is really impressive, it was good for 8 overall. The year Iginla scored 52, the next closest was 41. That's a 20 percent difference.
Iginla, in my opinion, has enough to get in with the Standards the Hall currently has. Not for the standard I would have.
