I have an "interesting" way to determine HOF qualifications.
Go to http://www.hockey-reference.com, type in a players name and at the bottom of the page count entries in Appearances on Leader Boards, Awards, and Honors.
Cam Neely has 54 entries
from the guys I've checked that are in the Hall that's pretty low. Not sure if comparing different positions this way is such a good idea.
A few others
Doug Gilmour 63
Lanny McDonald 69
Mats Sundin 78
John LeClair 92
Eric Lindros 95
Pavel Bure 99
I didnt say All-star teams wasn't significant. I asked if they were THAT significant.
Ummm.....No.
You didn't.
Here is what you said.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkrx
Seriously, does all-star teams even count as a significant?
....
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkrx
By the way. Cut down on the "lol"s it makes you look like a fourteen year old kid who lacks a significant amount of education.
Take a good look at that "sentence" above and say that again, I dare you.
I think you meant; "do all-star teams count as significant" ....and yes.
Yes they do.
Two years and over 5000 posts here, and I've never looked as uneducated as you do in that one "sentence".
So I'll make you a deal. You stop saying things that are absurdly comical and I'll stop laughing out loud at you. Until then you'll pardon me if I don't take advice about "looking educated" from someone who strings together barely intelligible posts like yourself.
M'Kay? Thanks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkrx
I'm still waiting for a fair list from you where you list GPG from players in their prime.
Yeah....O.K.. I'll get to that as soon as you get to the question you ignored three separate times on the first page of this thread:
"How is Neely different from every other 4 time All-Star right wing in NHL history? All of which are in the Hall."
("But wait?! Is that even significant?!!1!").
L.O.L. <---that one is specifically for you and your dazzling intellect.
IMHO the one player that I think is fortunate to be in the HHOF is Bill Barber, even though a very very good player he still lacks HHOF qualifications.
* The real issue isn't who should or shouldn't belongs in the HHOF but when compared to other sports HOF that hockey's has the less stringent requirements. As a matter of fact, it may be worthwhile discussion to have certain standards for the HOF like golf.
ie: 600 goals
1100 points
5 Norris Trophies
IMHO the one player that I think is fortunate to be in the HHOF is Bill Barber, even though a very very good player he still lacks HHOF qualifications.
* The real issue isn't who should or shouldn't belongs in the HHOF but when compared to other sports HOF that hockey's has the less stringent requirements. As a matter of fact, it may be worthwhile discussion to have certain standards for the HOF like golf.
ie: 600 goals
1100 points
5 Norris Trophies
Such ideas have been discussed at various times by the different sports where team play is the norm as opposed to individual play - golf.
Usually the idea features various benchmarks or levels that if attained induction is by default. There is usually a parallel mechanism where eligible athletes may be enshrined after debate and stringent voting conditions.
PNEP's HHOF monitor points are a step in this direction.
The idea gets shelved because once you allow for debate and discussion then you might as well go thru the process for every potential nominee. Transparency and the attendant media attention are also positives.
IMHO the one player that I think is fortunate to be in the HHOF is Bill Barber, even though a very very good player he still lacks HHOF qualifications.
* The real issue isn't who should or shouldn't belongs in the HHOF but when compared to other sports HOF that hockey's has the less stringent requirements. As a matter of fact, it may be worthwhile discussion to have certain standards for the HOF like golf.
ie: 600 goals
1100 points
5 Norris Trophies
I'd rather have Barber in than Gartner and his 700+ goals. Numbers only tell part of the picture.
Take a good look at that "sentence" above and say that again, I dare you.
I think you meant; "do all-star teams count as significant" ....and yes.
Yes they do.
Two years and over 5000 posts here, and I've never looked as uneducated as you do in that one "sentence".
So I'll make you a deal. You stop saying things that are absurdly comical and I'll stop laughing out loud at you. Until then you'll pardon me if I don't take advice about "looking educated" from someone who strings together barely intelligible posts like yourself.
M'Kay? Thanks.
Yeah....O.K.. I'll get to that as soon as you get to the question you ignored three separate times on the first page of this thread:
"How is Neely different from every other 4 time All-Star right wing in NHL history? All of which are in the Hall."
("But wait?! Is that even significant?!!1!").
L.O.L. <---that one is specifically for you and your dazzling intellect.
Oh good it has come down to mocking an old man who has problems with his writing because of a stroke now. You know there is a difference between a grammatical error and using the synonym "LOL" after each sentence right?
The difference between Neely and the other all-star right wings is that they had proper careers probably and did not get in HHoF only because of all-star team votes.
Lets see the others are Howe, Lafleur, Bossy, Kurri, Jagr and Hull. All of which has done a significant lot more than just getting on the all-star teams and all did on first all-star teams. Might have forgot someone though.
Oh good it has come down to mocking an old man who has problems with his writing because of a stroke now. You know there is a difference between a grammatical error and using the synonym "LOL" after each sentence right?
Hey pal, you are the one that started with the mocking.
I was just discussing NHL players, and you accused me of looking uneducated, due to my use of a common internet acronym. So save the sob story.
And yes, "lol" is an acronymic abbreviation, not a synonym.
....anyway my point remains. Being one of the top players in the world in four different seasons has become a sort of baseline for entrance into the Hall, seeing how currently only one player in NHL history is a four time all-star without being in the Hall, Rick Martin, (and he was a left wing).
Hey pal, you are the one that started with the mocking.
I was just discussing NHL players, and you accused me of looking uneducated, due to my use of a common internet acronym. So save the sob story.
And yes, "lol" is an acronymic abbreviation, not a synonym.
....anyway my point remains. Being one of the top players in the world in four different seasons has become a sort of baseline for entrance into the Hall, seeing how currently only one player in NHL history is a four time all-star without being in the Hall, Rick Martin, (and he was a left wing).
Accused you? No I gave you my opinion on how stupid you look when you contantly use "lol" as an interjection, that's all. If I would've accused you, I would have said you are stupid. What sob story? I explained why I might use poor grammar in some instances atleast I don't feel the need to write "lol" after each sentence.
Why do you keep using first all-star? None of the players whom have been inducted made it in because of making the second all-star team four times. Even Martin made the first twice and Neely none so do you think Martin should be inducted?
On the Leafs alone Dave Keon and George Armstrong were better,probably Kelly as well. Pulford was very good defensively and definitely deserves to be a HHOFer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MXD
Pulford wasn't even the best defensive player on his team, let alone of the era....
This is what happens when I post before noon without having coffee.
Pulford was the best defensive player... at certain things. He was the best at containing Gordie Howe, and the best penalty killer in the league (according to coaches polls from the era).
Definitely not better overall defensively than the likes of Keon though. The Gainey comparison was probably poor. Still don't think Pulford's induction is worse than "questionable" though. He was a bigger part of those Cup teams than Dick Duff ever was.
Accused you? No I gave you my opinion on how stupid you look when you contantly use "lol" as an interjection
And I gave my opinion on how stupid you look with your bad grammar, diction, and spelling.
Hey; I usually keep my "Grammar Nazi" tendencies to myself on the internet, but since you deemed my "lol's" as fodder for measuring intellect, I was happy to point out your grammar.
Like I said. I was discussing NHL players. Nothing more. You are the one that saw fit to bring up who's posts 'looked intelligent'.
You apparently wanted to dish it out but weren't too happy to take it.
And I gave my opinion on how stupid you look with your bad grammar, diction, and spelling.
Hey; I usually keep my "Grammar Nazi" tendencies to myself on the internet, but since you deemed my "lol's" as fodder for measuring intellect, I was happy to point out your grammar.
Like I said. I was discussing NHL players. Nothing more. You are the one that saw fit to bring up who's posts 'looked intelligent'.
You apparently wanted to dish it out but weren't too happy to take it.
Look over your post and tell me if its an opinion or openly mocking.
I made a litte remark. You made a whole post of ranting.
You can't win.
You made it personal.
Not me.
Facts are stubborn things.
....But I'm happy to move on.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkrx
Do you think Martin should be inducted?
No.
Making the all-star team as a LW in his day was a far easier task than as a right wing in Cam's day.
Generally speaking in the history of the NHL that has been the case. And was a long understood fact of the league.
Although, not to get too off-topic here, in the last decade or so we have really seen a new age of the left wing when you think about it.
Ovechkin
Kovalchuk
Zetterberg
Parise
Heatley
Vanek
