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.

Claude Lemieux = HHOF?

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-28-2005, 03:40 PM
  #26
God Bless Canada
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Bentley reunion
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,787
vCash: 500
Funny, didn't Neely score 16 goals in 19 games in 1991? And isn't that one goal off the record, even though Neely's team wasn't good enough to beat Pittsburgh, and Neely was playing hurt for much of the Pittsburgh series. While Claude was magnificent in the Cup victories of 86, 95 and 96 (he was a secondary player in 2000), he never had a playoff as good as Neely in 1991.

And I think RSBPC hit the nail on the head: replace Lemieux with an in his prime Neely, and Lemieux's teams still win their championships. Put Lemieux in Neely's place, Boston doesn't win. (Note: I'm not taking away from Lemieux's clutch play. I'm just saying an HHOF player would have had the same, if not a greater impact).

God Bless Canada is offline  
Old
10-28-2005, 03:40 PM
  #27
Psycho Papa Joe
Porkchop Hoser
 
Psycho Papa Joe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Cesspool, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,357
vCash: 500
Claude Lemieux was at least as good as Clark Gillies.

Psycho Papa Joe is offline  
Old
10-28-2005, 03:45 PM
  #28
lemieux32*
 
lemieux32*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 1,280
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RSBPC
If you take Claude Lemieux off of the 4 championship teams he was on, and replace him with Cam Neely, I'd bet that they all still win the Cup. Likewise...If you take Neely off of those late 80s/early 90s Bruins teams and replace him with Claude, they still don't win the cup.

Cam Neely was a much, much better hockey player than CLaude Lemieux. It really is not even close. Gee Wally brings up a great point. Which one would you rather have on your team?
So who would have shut down the opposing scorers if Claude was not on those Devils teams? Which makes another point about Cam, Claude shut him down. Which leads to the other side: with Lemieux scoring clutch goals who knows how much further the Bruins could have gone.

lemieux32* is offline  
Old
10-28-2005, 03:52 PM
  #29
Dr Love
Registered User
 
Dr Love's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Location, Location!
Posts: 20,378
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tao Jones
Sorry to go OT, but I'd like to see where Ray Bourque is on the Mike Gartner test.
Ray Bourque is no doubt about it Hall of Famer. There's no need to question his credentails. The Keltner List was made for players of questionable worthiness, that's what the Gartner test should be for as well.

Dr Love is offline  
Old
10-28-2005, 03:58 PM
  #30
habs_24x
Registered User
 
habs_24x's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,376
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by God Bless Canada
And I think RSBPC hit the nail on the head: replace Lemieux with an in his prime Neely, and Lemieux's teams still win their championships. Put Lemieux in Neely's place, Boston doesn't win.
how do you know this for a fact? ''put so and so in so and so's place and ...'' get real! makes no sense. the fact of the matter is Lemieux was extremely important for his teams when they won cups and no one can say that those teams would of still won if he hadnt been there.

habs_24x is offline  
Old
10-28-2005, 03:59 PM
  #31
Geese_Howard*
 
Geese_Howard*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 3,937
vCash: 500
no

wow that was easy

Geese_Howard* is offline  
Old
10-28-2005, 04:07 PM
  #32
Chileiceman
Registered User
 
Chileiceman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Toronto
Country: Chile
Posts: 8,485
vCash: 500
I sure hopes he makes it, but his chance is pretty slim IMO plus with all the good players that are retiring, I think that he ever does make he'll have to wait a while. The HOF is not that nice to defensive forwards.

Chileiceman is offline  
Old
10-28-2005, 04:07 PM
  #33
barfy2000
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Whitby, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,784
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tao Jones
Sorry to go OT, but I'd like to see where Ray Bourque is on the Mike Gartner test.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Love
Ray Bourque is no doubt about it Hall of Famer. There's no need to question his credentails. The Keltner List was made for players of questionable worthiness, that's what the Gartner test should be for as well.
i agree. but just for fun:

*There are no correct or incorrect answers to these questions. There is no ideal combination of answers. It is simply a set of questions that helps one put a player in a better perspective.*

The Gartner Test: Raymond Bourque

1. Was he ever regarded as the best player in hockey? Did anybody, while he was active, ever suggest that he was the best player in hockey?


Not to my knowledge. Maybe best defenceman....but i doubt someone woulda picked him over Gretzky or Lemieux at the time.

2. Was he the best player on his team?

Yes. For a large part of his career, i would say he was.

3. Was he the best player in hockey at his position? Was he the best player in his conference at his position?

Id say yes, slightly, to both accounts. Aside from coffey, i dont think anyone could've given Bourque a run for his money at top dman. Maybe chelios, leetch or macinnis...but id take Raymond over all of them by a hair.

4. Did he have an impact on a number of Cup runs?

Well...technically only one real cup run. But he had a few good postseasons.
23 pts. in 82/83
21 pts. in 87/88
17 pts. in 89/90
25 pts. in 90/91

5. Was he good enough that he could play regularly after passing his prime?

Sure was. He saw still a key player on the Bruins and even the Avs, well past his 35th.

6. Is he the very best hockey player in history who is not in the Hall of Fame?

He is in the hall of fame.

7. Are most players who have comparable statistics in the Hall of Fame?

Of course. Hes in the top 10 in all time scoring, and hes a defenceman. What more can you ask from a guy?
1579 points, 410 goals in 1612 career reg season games.
180 points, 41 goals in 214 career playoff games.

8. Do the player's numbers meet Hall of Fame standards?

Note: Hall of Fame Standards is a formula for the baseball hall of fame. Since we've already discussed his career numbers, this question will be passed.

9. Is there any evidence to suggest that the player was significantly better or worse than is suggested by his statistics?

Not really. Putting up those kind of numbers, you would think that he would be as bad as Phil Housley or Bryan Berard on the defensive side of the game, but that is not true. (Aside from the times he got schooled by Mario) He was, at the very worst, an above average defensive defenseman.

10. Is he the best player at his position who is eligible for the Hall of Fame?

All time? Nope. But, over the course of his hockey playing days, he forged a career that will not soon be forgotten.

11. How many MVP-type seasons did he have? Did he ever win an MVP award? If not, how many times was he close? How many awards total did he ever win?

None. Playing in the heydey of some of the all time great forwards will do that to you. Aside from Pronger in 00', no dman has won the pearson since 1975 (orr). 1972 for the hart (orr). He won 5 norris trophies (leagues best defenseman), the calder memorial trophy (best rookie) and king clancy (on and off ice contributions).

12. How many All-Star-type seasons did he have? How many All-Star games did he play in? Did most of the players who played in this many All-Star games go into the Hall of Fame?

Ray was the recipient of 17 postseason all star selections, good for second all time, next to only gordie howe. He also holds the record for most consecutive all star game appearances. (19)

13. If this man were the best player on his team, would it be likely that the team could make the Finals?

Yes.

14. What impact did the player have on hockey history? Was he responsible for any rule changes? Did he introduce any new equipment? Did he change the game in any way?

Umm..him and coffey inspired a lot of young puck moving, dmen?

15. Did the player uphold the standards of sportsmanship and character that the Hall of Fame, in its written guidelines, instructs us to consider?

Ray bourque was one of the greatest ambassadors of the game. a real class act. I have never heard anyone say any bad things about the guy. When he came back to boston after asking for a trade to colorado, the home fans cheered him even when he scored a goal. How can you not like the guy?


Last edited by barfy2000: 10-28-2005 at 04:13 PM.
barfy2000 is offline  
Old
10-28-2005, 04:41 PM
  #34
Jag68Sid87
Registered User
 
Jag68Sid87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 28,041
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Psycho Papa Joe
Claude Lemieux was at least as good as Clark Gillies.
Which means nothing, unless you believe in Gillies as a HOFer. I certainly don't.

Jag68Sid87 is offline  
Old
10-28-2005, 04:43 PM
  #35
Psycho Papa Joe
Porkchop Hoser
 
Psycho Papa Joe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Cesspool, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,357
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jag68Vlady27
Which means nothing, unless you believe in Gillies as a HOFer. I certainly don't.
I don't, but he's there, therefore Lemieux should at least be given a long look.

PS Glen Anderson was better than either guy IMO.

Psycho Papa Joe is offline  
Old
10-28-2005, 04:47 PM
  #36
Jag68Sid87
Registered User
 
Jag68Sid87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 28,041
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Psycho Papa Joe
I don't, but he's there, therefore Lemieux should at least be given a long look.

PS Glen Anderson was better than either guy IMO.
Actually, he should NOT be given a long look but he WILL, and that's because of Gillies. And I definitely agree with you on Anderson. It's a joke that he isn't in yet.

Jag68Sid87 is offline  
Old
10-28-2005, 04:50 PM
  #37
Tao Jones
Registered User
 
Tao Jones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 6,801
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Love
Ray Bourque is no doubt about it Hall of Famer. There's no need to question his credentails. The Keltner List was made for players of questionable worthiness, that's what the Gartner test should be for as well.
No question. Just anticipating the comparisons for when it's Scott Stevens turn, and the questioning of the character of his hits is inevitably raised.

Tao Jones is online now  
Old
10-28-2005, 06:09 PM
  #38
RSBPC
Registered User
 
RSBPC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 2,356
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by lemieux32
So who would have shut down the opposing scorers if Claude was not on those Devils teams? Which makes another point about Cam, Claude shut him down. Which leads to the other side: with Lemieux scoring clutch goals who knows how much further the Bruins could have gone.
Let me cut to the chase. Simple yes or no question.

Do you think Claude Lemieux was a better hockey player than Cam Neely?

RSBPC is offline  
Old
10-28-2005, 06:12 PM
  #39
BuppY
Registered User
 
BuppY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,157
vCash: 500
No Way He Gets In!!

BuppY is offline  
Old
10-28-2005, 06:36 PM
  #40
VanIslander
10 Years of ATDing
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 17,869
vCash: 500
Would you want Selanne in the hall over Claude?

I don't understand why the regular season is often revered so much.
Hockey players know the real season is the PLAYOFFS !
I value the playoffs at least equal in value to the regular season (no way in hell Selanne makes the hall imo).
And Claude Lemieux was a playoff superstar! Yes, superstar.

How many playoff GAME-WINNING GOALS (GWG) did he have? It was something obscenely high. I think only Gretzky and Brett Hull ever had more.

If they ever opened a special exhibit for playoff warriors, then Claude Lemieux and Esa Tikkanen would be front and center.

VanIslander is offline  
Old
10-28-2005, 07:46 PM
  #41
Crosbyfan
Registered User
 
Crosbyfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 7,581
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VanIslander
Would you want Selanne in the hall over Claude?

I don't understand why the regular season is often revered so much.
Hockey players know the real season is the PLAYOFFS !
I value the playoffs at least equal in value to the regular season (no way in hell Selanne makes the hall imo).
And Claude Lemieux was a playoff superstar! Yes, superstar.

How many playoff GAME-WINNING GOALS (GWG) did he have? It was something obscenely high. I think only Gretzky and Brett Hull ever had more.

If they ever opened a special exhibit for playoff warriors, then Claude Lemieux and Esa Tikkanen would be front and center.
Is Tikkanen in? I would put him in ahead of Lemieux or Anderson although both Tikkanen and Anderson are good comparisons to Claude in different ways.

Crosbyfan is offline  
Old
10-28-2005, 08:01 PM
  #42
VanIslander
10 Years of ATDing
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 17,869
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crosbyfan
Is Tikkanen in? I would put him in ahead of Lemieux or Anderson although both Tikkanen and Anderson are good comparisons to Claude in different ways.
I don't think Tikkanen is in. But like Claude, he shone as a star in the playoffs, not the regular season.

Anderson is in. But he scored a lot more goals in the regular season compared to those two, though he was less valuable playoff wise (though still somewhat clutch).

VanIslander is offline  
Old
10-28-2005, 08:04 PM
  #43
John Flyers Fan
Registered User
 
John Flyers Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 22,345
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VanIslander
I don't think Tikkanen is in. But like Claude, he shone as a star in the playoffs, not the regular season.

Anderson is in. But he scored a lot more goals in the regular season compared to those two, though he was less valuable playoff wise (though still somewhat clutch).
Andy was supremely clutch ... 6 Cups .. and I believe only 3 players in NHL history have more playoff OT goals. (Sakic, Roenick and Richard)

John Flyers Fan is offline  
Old
10-28-2005, 08:19 PM
  #44
arrbez
bad chi
 
arrbez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,611
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to arrbez
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Flyers Fan
Andy was supremely clutch ... 6 Cups .. and I believe only 3 players in NHL history have more playoff OT goals. (Sakic, Roenick and Richard)
yeah, i think the main argument for Anderson is that he was so good in the playoffs. his regular season stats are good, but not terribly impressive compared to a number of other guys

arrbez is offline  
Old
10-28-2005, 09:33 PM
  #45
Transported Upstater
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Take care, all. :)
Country: United States
Posts: 22,984
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gee Wally
If you had Cam would you trade him straight up for Claude ?



( I rest my case )


I would certainly trade Cam Neely straight up for Lemieux, but only if that particular Lemieux was a Montreal-born center named Mario.





Other than that, LONG LIVE SEABASS!!!!!!

Transported Upstater is offline  
Old
10-28-2005, 09:35 PM
  #46
Transported Upstater
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Take care, all. :)
Country: United States
Posts: 22,984
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Psycho Papa Joe
I don't, but he's there, therefore Lemieux should at least be given a long look.

PS Glen Anderson was better than either guy IMO.


Anderson was both helped and harmed by playing on the 80's Oilers, no doubt about it.

Transported Upstater is offline  
Old
10-28-2005, 10:10 PM
  #47
Irish Blues
____________________
 
Irish Blues's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Country: St Helena
Posts: 21,804
vCash: 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by TransportedUpstater
Anderson was both helped and harmed by playing on the 80's Oilers, no doubt about it.
Anderson's biggest problem is that he ran to the Caribbean and is skipping out on paying child support. When he comes back to Canada and finally does the right thing, he'll get in pretty quick.

Until then, while he deserves to be in, he's not about to get a sniff of consideration.

Brad Park on the other hand, it's still a travesty he's not in.

Lemieux? As much as he was clutch in the playoffs and a big part of 4 Stanley Cup champions (and the guy you absolutely hated but still wanted on your team come playoff time in the mid-to-late 90s), at the end of the day I have to say no as well.

Irish Blues is offline  
Old
10-28-2005, 10:16 PM
  #48
reckoning
Registered User
 
reckoning's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,187
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irish Blues
Anderson's biggest problem is that he ran to the Caribbean and is skipping out on paying child support. When he comes back to Canada and finally does the right thing, he'll get in pretty quick.

Until then, while he deserves to be in, he's not about to get a sniff of consideration.

Brad Park on the other hand, it's still a travesty he's not in.
Brad Park is already in.

reckoning is online now  
Old
10-28-2005, 10:16 PM
  #49
Bring Back Bucky
Registered User
 
Bring Back Bucky's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Delicieux!
Country: Heard and McDonald Islands
Posts: 7,824
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irish Blues
Anderson's biggest problem is that he ran to the Caribbean and is skipping out on paying child support. When he comes back to Canada and finally does the right thing, he'll get in pretty quick.

Until then, while he deserves to be in, he's not about to get a sniff of consideration.

Brad Park on the other hand, it's still a travesty he's not in.

Lemieux? As much as he was clutch in the playoffs and a big part of 4 Stanley Cup champions (and the guy you absolutely hated but still wanted on your team come playoff time in the mid-to-late 90s), at the end of the day I have to say no as well.

Brad Park is in the Hall, has been since 98

Anderson has appeared in court in BC to face the music. I can't remember the outcome, but believe he has no income or interest in earning one to show that he's not a loser as a parent.

Bring Back Bucky is offline  
Old
10-28-2005, 10:29 PM
  #50
Transported Upstater
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Take care, all. :)
Country: United States
Posts: 22,984
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bring Back Bucky
Brad Park is in the Hall, has been since 98

Anderson has appeared in court in BC to face the music. I can't remember the outcome, but believe he has no income or interest in earning one to show that he's not a loser as a parent.

Park = 1st team All-Underrated.


That's kind of disappointing for Anderson...He wasn't a quitter as a player, why should he act that way now?

Transported Upstater is offline  
Closed Thread

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 10:33 AM.

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.