I'm not as sure. Hart or no, Pronger in 2004 was considered injury-prone, overpaid and a horrific
If he retires in 2004... Does his Hart get lumped in and written off with Theodore's as a result of voters getting tired of always giving it to forwards?
I think he gets remembered as a promising blueliner who took ages to develop, then had a couple years as a top-flight guy, then had the serious wrist injury and a number of playoff flameouts. Is that legacy as good as Rob Blake's? I'd say no... Because Blake was clutch guy. And Blake appears to be a borderline HHOF candidate in some corners.
i'd add that macinnis almost winning a second norris in '03 did pronger no favours. going into the lockout, on top of being considered injury prone and not a great playoff performer, he was also considered overrated. typical "what you done for me lately?" thinking, but imagine if he had ended his career on that note...
I'm not as sure. Hart or no, Pronger in 2004 was considered injury-prone, overpaid and a horrific
If he retires in 2004... Does his Hart get lumped in and written off with Theodore's as a result of voters getting tired of always giving it to forwards?
I think he gets remembered as a promising blueliner who took ages to develop, then had a couple years as a top-flight guy, then had the serious wrist injury and a number of playoff flameouts. Is that legacy as good as Rob Blake's? I'd say no... Because Blake was clutch guy. And Blake appears to be a borderline HHOF candidate in some corners.
I don't think his Hart gets lumped with the likes of Theodore. We can at least see that Pronger had other elite seasons. He was still a 2nd team all-star two other times. The Hart trophy was not a fluke either. Jagr wins it had he played a full season and not 63 games but either way Pronger had a Hart-caliber season.
The playoff flameouts would bother me too with him. There would be a huge "what if" thing associated with him. He would be 29 at the time of retirement and let's just say he is not Bobby Orr in this regards. Pronger would be hotly debated that's for sure.
Remember when Selanne was expected to retire after the 06/07 Cup? He's scored 123 goals and 148 assists
since then. He has aged incredibly. I'm not so sure if he's considered a lock for the Hall of Fame without this phenomenal late-career surge.
Interesting comparisons. I think a lot of people think Mullen's place of birth helped him get in. So Francis would have been 19th in career scoring in 1996. That's pretty crazy, considering he only would have had 2 top 10 finishes in points by then. But you're right, it's probably enough to get him in, though probably not first ballot.
Oh no question in my mind it did. He was the first American to 500 goals, that was a huge deal heading into his induction. He was a very solid player for a long time, and as a result put up some real nice numbers. But that said, I'm not convinced that he was even as good a player over his career as Tkachuk, or Roenick, and maybe not even Weight when era's considered. And all 3 of them are considered rather borderline candidates for the Hall.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DisgruntledGoat
I'm not as sure. Hart or no, Pronger in 2004 was considered injury-prone, overpaid and a horrific
If he retires in 2004... Does his Hart get lumped in and written off with Theodore's as a result of voters getting tired of always giving it to forwards?
I think he gets remembered as a promising blueliner who took ages to develop, then had a couple years as a top-flight guy, then had the serious wrist injury and a number of playoff flameouts. Is that legacy as good as Rob Blake's? I'd say no... Because Blake was clutch guy. And Blake appears to be a borderline HHOF candidate in some corners.
I honestly think pre-Lockout Pronger would have been looked at in a similar vein as Neely to be honest. 3 AS teams vs 4, but with a Norris, Hart, 1st team and 2 second teams vs 4 second teams. IIRC I don't really think Pronger had the reputation as being a dirty player until he played a couple years in Anaheim. Hard nosed, physical, absolutely... but not dirty. I think not having the negative rep in that regard would have helped him. Then again I wasn't following the west nearly as much when he was on St Louis so I might be completely off-base there... wouldn't be the first time.
Neely definitely had stronger playoff performances on weaker teams on his side by retirement vs that point in Pronger's career.
Oh no question in my mind it did. He was the first American to 500 goals, that was a huge deal heading into his induction. He was a very solid player for a long time, and as a result put up some real nice numbers. But that said, I'm not convinced that he was even as good a player over his career as Tkachuk, or Roenick, and maybe not even Weight when era's considered. And all 3 of them are considered rather borderline candidates for the Hall.
no doubt being the highest scoring american of all time helped mullen get in.
but let us not forget that he has a postseason record that two of those three americans you named could only dream about.
no doubt being the highest scoring american of all time helped mullen get in.
but let us not forget that he has a postseason record that two of those three americans you named could only dream about.
It has helped him for sure. That being said, I think Mullen tends to get a bad rap at times. Yes being American and hitting that golden 500 number was special, but let's say he isn't in the HHOF. Is he an often discussed player that "should" be in? It would be hard to believe that had Mullen not gotten inducted that we wouldn't be questioning whether or not he deserves it or not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveG
I honestly think pre-Lockout Pronger would have been looked at in a similar vein as Neely to be honest. 3 AS teams vs 4, but with a Norris, Hart, 1st team and 2 second teams vs 4 second teams. IIRC I don't really think Pronger had the reputation as being a dirty player until he played a couple years in Anaheim. Hard nosed, physical, absolutely... but not dirty. I think not having the negative rep in that regard would have helped him. Then again I wasn't following the west nearly as much when he was on St Louis so I might be completely off-base there... wouldn't be the first time.
I remember in the 1998 playoffs when St. Louis and Detroit played. There was a play where Igor Larionov got tied up with Pronger and Pronger went down to the ice and his errant stick caught Larionov in the ear. On the surface it looked unintentional. But Kelly Hrudey, who was an analyst for the game felt Pronger intentionally did that as he was falling down and he said something along the lines of "this is the kind of fierce play I respect out of Pronger". So yeah, I think he always had that edge to him.
It has helped him for sure. That being said, I think Mullen tends to get a bad rap at times. Yes being American and hitting that golden 500 number was special, but let's say he isn't in the HHOF. Is he an often discussed player that "should" be in? It would be hard to believe that had Mullen not gotten inducted that we wouldn't be questioning whether or not he deserves it or not.
I'd have been pushing for him to get in myself... but I also would like to see Roenick, Weight, Tkachuk, and a plethora of others (especially the star Soviet era Europeans who are still waiting) get in, a coaches wing established, etc. I'm one of the few that thinks the Hall needs to get rid of the 4 per year rule and be a little bit more inclusive especially with the expansion of the game internationally and even within the NHL itself.
... but then again I do rail against the Dick Duff induction.
I'd have been pushing for him to get in myself... but I also would like to see Roenick, Weight, Tkachuk, and a plethora of others (especially the star Soviet era Europeans who are still waiting) get in, a coaches wing established, etc. I'm one of the few that thinks the Hall needs to get rid of the 4 per year rule and be a little bit more inclusive especially with the expansion of the game internationally and even within the NHL itself.
... but then again I do rail against the Dick Duff induction.
to me, mullen is a clear step above all those other guys. i mean, when you have playoff scoring finishes of 3, 3, and 5 and twice led the playoffs in goals, i think that puts you beyond the "hall of very good" or "needs more american representation" guys.
he's still probably a borderline guy according to most people on the board's cut off points, but i find it really hard to look at mullen's career and tkachuk's career and say i'd rather have had tkachuk on my team, either for a peak season, for a prime, or over an entire career.
I'd have been pushing for him to get in myself... but I also would like to see Roenick, Weight, Tkachuk, and a plethora of others (especially the star Soviet era Europeans who are still waiting) get in, a coaches wing established, etc. I'm one of the few that thinks the Hall needs to get rid of the 4 per year rule and be a little bit more inclusive especially with the expansion of the game internationally and even within the NHL itself.
... but then again I do rail against the Dick Duff induction.
Tkachuk I wouldn't like to see in there at all. Weight is even below Tkachuk and I've never really heard much of a push for him to get in there. Roenick I can see, because he is more or less borderline, much like Theo Fleury, but I also find Roenick will get in for his bark rather than his bite. I can't see the HHOF keeping him out because he is "popular". Seriously, I think that will help him, because if you judge him just on his on-ice play you could easily keep him out. Mullen gets in because of the Cups as well, no doubt. But also because of the contribution to those Cups, especially in 1989. That was one season that he had that was better than all the other mentioned American players.
I'm surprised that two people out of 21 have voted against Yzerman.
He had 517 goals and 1255 points in 942 games, and had been nominated for the Selke. He had more points than any other player during his career except for Wayne Gretzky and Mario Lemieux. By the end of 2000 he would pass Lemieux for 2nd, and add a Selke and 1st team selection (although that isn't relevant to this discussion).
He had posted the best non-Gretzky/Lemieux season ever seen in 1988-89.
He had been a top-5 and top-10 scorer many times.
Guaranteed HHOFer.
There are several seasons from Orr and Howe that are clearly better than any of Yzerman's. Even if one looks at the best seasons over the past 20-30 years, I'm not convinced that Yzerman's 1989 campaign is the best - one could certainly make a case for Hasek 1998, Fedorov 1994, Jagr 1999, Ovechkin 2008, Sakic 2001.
