HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The History of Hockey
The History of Hockey Relive great moments in hockey history and discuss how the game has changed over time.

If Cam Neely is in the Hall, then why Tim Kerr isn't?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-25-2013, 02:39 PM
  #1
Passchendaele
Registered User
 
Passchendaele's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Laval, Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,396
vCash: 500
If Cam Neely is in the Hall, then why Tim Kerr isn't?

The similarities between those two guys are interesting.

- Both were big guys who could fight (and they were good at it)
- Both elite goal scorers
- Both pretty good playoff performers
- Both had their careers cut short by injuries

From 1983 to 1987, Kerr scored 224 goals (54-54-58-58). Two years later, he scored 48 goals in 69 games (on pace for 56 goals).

He (1.03) even has a better career PPG than Neely (0.96).

Did Neely's freak 50 goals in 44 games season make the difference?

Passchendaele is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-25-2013, 03:32 PM
  #2
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 7,646
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Passchendaele View Post
The similarities between those two guys are interesting.

- Both were big guys who could fight (and they were good at it)
- Both elite goal scorers
- Both pretty good playoff performers
- Both had their careers cut short by injuries

From 1983 to 1987, Kerr scored 224 goals (54-54-58-58). Two years later, he scored 48 goals in 69 games (on pace for 56 goals).

He (1.03) even has a better career PPG than Neely (0.96).

Did Neely's freak 50 goals in 44 games season make the difference?
Don't recall ever seeing Kerr in a fight. Nor body check the way Neely did.

Dennis Bonvie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-25-2013, 03:43 PM
  #3
Psycho Papa Joe
Porkchop Hoser
 
Psycho Papa Joe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Cesspool, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,357
vCash: 500
Having seen them both, I'd say Neely did everything as good or better than Kerr.

Psycho Papa Joe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-25-2013, 03:55 PM
  #4
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Pacific NW
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,180
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dennis Bonvie View Post
Don't recall ever seeing Kerr in a fight. Nor body check the way Neely did.
Appears to have been in about 22 fights over his career, 7 of which came during his sophmore season compared to Neely's app 80. As for Kerr's checking game, no, definitely not on par with Cam Neely. Four time 50 or more goal scorer though, so not shabby.

Killion is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-25-2013, 04:25 PM
  #5
kmad
Riot Survivor
 
kmad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 31,784
vCash: 500
Neely was a gamebreaking power forward who redefined the position, Tim Kerr just stood in front of the net on the powerplay.

kmad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-25-2013, 06:04 PM
  #6
MS
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 12,010
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vancouver Blazers View Post
Neely was a gamebreaking power forward who redefined the position, Tim Kerr just stood in front of the net on the powerplay.
Yup, exactly.

It isn't the Hall of Statistics. They might look a bit similar on paper to someone who isn't familiar with the sport, but Neely was 'great' and 'important' and Kerr was not.

MS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-25-2013, 07:51 PM
  #7
Sens Rule
Registered User
 
Sens Rule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,091
vCash: 500
Kerr is like Andreychuk. If Andreychuk had Kerr's peak, and his his own longevity then he would make the HHOF. But Andreychuk doesn't have the peak and Kerr doesn't have the longevity.

Kerr is more similar to Leclair. But Leclair has those 5 end of season All-Stars.

Neely is not a similiar player.

Sens Rule is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-25-2013, 08:18 PM
  #8
Mayor Bee
\/me_____you\/
 
Mayor Bee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 14,176
vCash: 500
Back in high school, two of my friends were desperate to get laid for the first time. Both ended up doing the deed with girls that weren't exactly marriage material, and both regretted that.

Friend A decided that since it was already done, there was no sense in actually holding anything back; he went through a series of rather unsavory partners. Friend B decided that it was too meaningful to squander again, so he decided to wait for someone that he really cared about.

I'm not going to judge anyone's lifestyle choices; I'm only drawing a parallel between that and the HOF (which is obviously a lofty honor). Friend A would say that since Neely is in, so should Tim Kerr. But why stop there? Kerr had some dominant seasons, but not a sustained high level of play. But John Ogrodnick did. So did Steve Larmer, and Pat Verbeek, and Dave Taylor, and Brian Propp...where would it end?

Friend B would say that, although Neely's induction is done and cannot be undone, that it should not be used as a basis of comparison for future inductions of his contemporaries. Based on actual on-ice achievements, Neely is near the bottom of HHOF inductees; the gaps are filled in based on the fact that he suffered career-altering injuries. He was never a first-team All-Star, he won no awards except the Masterton, he was never in the top 10 in assists or points, he never led the league in goals (and was in the top five only twice), he didn't kill penalties during his career. His entire case is built on a short resume and a lot of filled-in gaps.

If you compare Neely to two other roughly contemporary players who were disrupted mid-career by serious injuries, then whose retirement was forced by injuries (Pat Lafontaine and Pavel Bure), I think it's reasonable to say that Neely is a pretty distant 3rd to those two. And Bure actually played even fewer games than Neely, yet produced more in a much lower-scoring era.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vancouver Blazers View Post
Neely was a gamebreaking power forward who redefined the position, Tim Kerr just stood in front of the net on the powerplay.
Are power play goals worth less than even strength? Are there bonuses for whether it came from a gamebreaking power forward instead of someone else?

Or I can point out that Kerr had a split of 220/150/0 in his goals, and Neely had 252/142/1. 36% of Neely's goals came on the power play, compared to 40.5% for Kerr. That's not exactly a huge difference.


Last edited by Mayor Bee: 12-25-2013 at 08:29 PM.
Mayor Bee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-25-2013, 09:56 PM
  #9
beauchamp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Laval, Qc
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,497
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sens Rule View Post
Kerr is like Andreychuk. If Andreychuk had Kerr's peak, and his his own longevity then he would make the HHOF. But Andreychuk doesn't have the peak and Kerr doesn't have the longevity.

Kerr is more similar to Leclair. But Leclair has those 5 end of season All-Stars.

Neely is not a similiar player.


I wanted to post that Kerr was his generation's Andreychuk but you beat to it.

A forward should be able to skate to get in HOF.

A d-man gets a little more leeway, but not much.

beauchamp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-25-2013, 10:25 PM
  #10
Passchendaele
Registered User
 
Passchendaele's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Laval, Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,396
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by beauchamp View Post


I wanted to post that Kerr was his generation's Andreychuk but you beat to it.
Andreychuk and Kerr were born only three years apart: they played in the same era. Except, all throughout the 80s, Andreychuk peaked at 40 goals. He hit 50 only when paired with a scary dominant (179 assists in two seasons!) Doug Gilmour.

Also, as far as I know, Phil Esposito wasn't much of a skater either, and scored a lot of those "garbage goals".

Passchendaele is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-26-2013, 05:28 AM
  #11
the edler
Inimitable
 
the edler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 2,346
vCash: 500
Who did Kerr have to set him up? Neely was a very good player, and there's a few worse players than him in the Hall, but the fact he had Bourque and Oates to back him up in the early 90s makes me hesitant when people throw him in the same category as Bure or Lindros. I don't think he was that good. He wasn't Lindros physical. And would he have scored almost 60 goals in consecutive seasons on the Panthers in the DPE? I don't know about that.

the edler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-26-2013, 08:15 AM
  #12
tony d
Thanks for memories
 
tony d's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Behind A Tree
Country: Canada
Posts: 34,184
vCash: 500
Yeah, I think Neely and Kerr where very different. Neely was more of power forward while Kerr was a good goal scorer.

__________________
tony d is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-26-2013, 09:18 AM
  #13
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,079
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mayor Bee View Post
Back in high school, two of my friends were desperate to get laid for the first time. Both ended up doing the deed with girls that weren't exactly marriage material, and both regretted that.

Friend A decided that since it was already done, there was no sense in actually holding anything back; he went through a series of rather unsavory partners. Friend B decided that it was too meaningful to squander again, so he decided to wait for someone that he really cared about.

I'm not going to judge anyone's lifestyle choices; I'm only drawing a parallel between that and the HOF (which is obviously a lofty honor). Friend A would say that since Neely is in, so should Tim Kerr. But why stop there? Kerr had some dominant seasons, but not a sustained high level of play. But John Ogrodnick did. So did Steve Larmer, and Pat Verbeek, and Dave Taylor, and Brian Propp...where would it end?

Friend B would say that, although Neely's induction is done and cannot be undone, that it should not be used as a basis of comparison for future inductions of his contemporaries. Based on actual on-ice achievements, Neely is near the bottom of HHOF inductees; the gaps are filled in based on the fact that he suffered career-altering injuries. He was never a first-team All-Star, he won no awards except the Masterton, he was never in the top 10 in assists or points, he never led the league in goals (and was in the top five only twice), he didn't kill penalties during his career. His entire case is built on a short resume and a lot of filled-in gaps.

If you compare Neely to two other roughly contemporary players who were disrupted mid-career by serious injuries, then whose retirement was forced by injuries (Pat Lafontaine and Pavel Bure), I think it's reasonable to say that Neely is a pretty distant 3rd to those two. And Bure actually played even fewer games than Neely, yet produced more in a much lower-scoring era.



Are power play goals worth less than even strength? Are there bonuses for whether it came from a gamebreaking power forward instead of someone else?

Or I can point out that Kerr had a split of 220/150/0 in his goals, and Neely had 252/142/1. 36% of Neely's goals came on the power play, compared to 40.5% for Kerr. That's not exactly a huge difference.
Interesting perspective, to say the least...lol

That being said the difference between the 2 guys isn't as great as the Neely supporters will make it out to be.

Neely was better but his induction to the HHOF was a mistake, much like Clark Gillies and others before that open up the well "if Neely is in why not player A", in this case Tim Kerr.

And really how gamebreaking can any player be with hockey being a cntury old and even those that were gamebreaking back in the day, does it or should it really matter?

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-26-2013, 05:03 PM
  #14
Hobnobs
Pinko
 
Hobnobs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Country: Sweden
Posts: 2,961
vCash: 500
Problem isnt that Kerr isnt in, its that Neely, Gillies and so on are but Makarov isnt.

Hobnobs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-26-2013, 05:15 PM
  #15
kmad
Riot Survivor
 
kmad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 31,784
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mayor Bee View Post
Are power play goals worth less than even strength? Are there bonuses for whether it came from a gamebreaking power forward instead of someone else?

Or I can point out that Kerr had a split of 220/150/0 in his goals, and Neely had 252/142/1. 36% of Neely's goals came on the power play, compared to 40.5% for Kerr. That's not exactly a huge difference.
You're missing the point. Neely was a dominant force, Kerr was a hard to move body in front of the net. Like Eric Lindros vs. Dave Andreychuk.

kmad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-26-2013, 05:19 PM
  #16
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,969
vCash: 500
Neely was the "prototypical power forward" and while I think that skill set is sometimes overrated, it's definitely an aspect to the game that Kerr didn't bring. Neely was a beast in corners, while Kerr just wasn't very valuable outside the front of the net.

And while Neely was no speed demon or defensive whiz himself, Kerr was noteworthy as a very poor skater and defensive player.


Last edited by TheDevilMadeMe: 12-26-2013 at 05:26 PM.
TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-26-2013, 05:25 PM
  #17
Jules Winnfield
I gives no ****s!!!
 
Jules Winnfield's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 5,755
vCash: 500
Tim Kerr was the ultimate power play forward in front of the net. You could not move him. When he had the puck 5-15 feet around the net he was going to score. I watched him burn the Pens many a nights. He was really a combination of Andreychuk and Holmstrom.

I'm torn on whether he should be considered a HOFer. At the time he was a beast but it kinda reminds me of Adam Dunn hitting home runs in baseball. He was really good at one thing and not so much at everything else.

That said, I sure as hell would want him on my team and he'd be on the 1st PP unit.

Jules Winnfield is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-26-2013, 09:04 PM
  #18
Mayor Bee
\/me_____you\/
 
Mayor Bee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 14,176
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vancouver Blazers View Post
You're missing the point. Neely was a dominant force, Kerr was a hard to move body in front of the net. Like Eric Lindros vs. Dave Andreychuk.
No, I understand the point; I just wonder how important it really is.

I remember in high school, we played a team that had a tremendous running back (five-star national recruit) who averaged huge numbers. We won that game, and I thought that we had shut him down completely. Checked the paper the next morning, and he'd actually put up something like 190 yards and 2 touchdowns. The touchdowns weren't spectacular, and most of his yards were on carries of under 10 yards instead of the long breakaways that he'd had all year. It didn't seem like he'd done much, when in fact he'd produced quite a bit.

I'm not disputing that Neely was a more rounded player than Kerr, although the extent to which he possessed an overall game was overrated. I'm not disputing that Neely was more feared physically; that's not really relevant. I am disputing the fact that Neely's actual career as it was, not as it could have been, is HOF worthy.

Mayor Bee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-26-2013, 09:11 PM
  #19
Mayor Bee
\/me_____you\/
 
Mayor Bee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 14,176
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jules Winnfield View Post
I'm torn on whether he should be considered a HOFer. At the time he was a beast but it kinda reminds me of Adam Dunn hitting home runs in baseball. He was really good at one thing and not so much at everything else.
Ah, one of my favorite topics...Adam Dunn.

Among guys who hit home runs and struck out a ton, Dunn was actually pretty well-rounded in his prime. He wouldn't hit into double plays (unlike Dave Kingman), which saved a lot of outs. He would also walk a ton, which added quite a bit of production.

Of course, he was a butcher in the field and added no additional threat as far as baserunning was concerned, but he was a nice option to have.

Mayor Bee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-26-2013, 10:33 PM
  #20
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,079
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mayor Bee View Post
Ah, one of my favorite topics...Adam Dunn.

Among guys who hit home runs and struck out a ton, Dunn was actually pretty well-rounded in his prime. He wouldn't hit into double plays (unlike Dave Kingman), which saved a lot of outs. He would also walk a ton, which added quite a bit of production.

Of course, he was a butcher in the field and added no additional threat as far as baserunning was concerned, but he was a nice option to have.
Dunn, king of the 3 outcomes, and you are right guys not doubling into plays is something bill James points out very useful and under rated.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-27-2013, 12:33 AM
  #21
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 20,323
vCash: 500
Neely doesn't belong in the HOF. It's that simple. He's exhibit A of what's wrong with the Hall. No transparency, old boys network, arbitrary inductions... neither has a HOF resume. And his inclusion is a big reason why the Hockey HOF is a joke.

Lafleurs Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-27-2013, 09:17 AM
  #22
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,139
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sens Rule View Post
Kerr is like Andreychuk. If Andreychuk had Kerr's peak, and his his own longevity then he would make the HHOF. But Andreychuk doesn't have the peak and Kerr doesn't have the longevity.

Kerr is more similar to Leclair. But Leclair has those 5 end of season All-Stars.

Neely is not a similiar player.
Exactly who I think. Leclair is similar - career wise and playing style - to Kerr. Both were big, neither were pushovers but both focused on goal scoring over fighting or physical play. Neither Leclair or Kerr have the longevity to get into the HHOF. In fact, Neely doesn't either which makes him a polarizing pick at times. However, Neely does have the physical dimension to him and I think gets a little more credit in the mold of "what could have been"

Big Phil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-27-2013, 09:29 AM
  #23
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 20,323
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Phil View Post
Exactly who I think. Leclair is similar - career wise and playing style - to Kerr. Both were big, neither were pushovers but both focused on goal scoring over fighting or physical play. Neither Leclair or Kerr have the longevity to get into the HHOF. In fact, Neely doesn't either which makes him a polarizing pick at times. However, Neely does have the physical dimension to him and I think gets a little more credit in the mold of "what could have been"
Different players for sure. Neely was a better all-around player but Kerr's offensive production is actually slightly better.

Kerr was one dimensional but his work in the crease is an under-appreciated skill. Not only does the goalie have to worry about Kerr himself but he's screened by him and it gives his teammates like Propp and Howe room to manoeuver. It doesn't always show up in the points column but that kind of work is huge for any team. Kerr in my estimation is the most underrated player of the 80s. He's a 'coulda been' story if there ever was one and I think if (there's that word again) he was healthy in '87 the Flyers win the cup.

So Neely is better but not so much so that he should make the Hall in his 2nd or 3rd year of eligibility and Kerr doesn't sniff it. While they are different types of players - they are similar caliber players (both with HOF talent) but neither has a HOF resume. The difference is that one is in and the other isn't.

Lafleurs Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-27-2013, 09:45 AM
  #24
Epsilon
#TeamHolland
 
Epsilon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Florence, SC
Posts: 35,488
vCash: 500
Let's be clear: a big reason Neely is in the HOF is that he's a player a lot of people involved with hockey liked who got hurt in altercations with a player a lot of those same people didn't like.

Epsilon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-27-2013, 10:36 AM
  #25
Eisen
Registered User
 
Eisen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Eugene
Country: Germany
Posts: 6,412
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Epsilon View Post
Let's be clear: a big reason Neely is in the HOF is that he's a player a lot of people involved with hockey liked who got hurt in altercations with a player a lot of those same people didn't like.
I think so too. Definitely one of the weaker inductions.

Eisen is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:55 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.