Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
devilsrule33

HHOF Class of 2013 Thread

HHOF 2013   255 votes

  1. 1. Who do you think should be part of the HHOF Class of 2013

    • Dave Andreychuk
      11
    • Rob Blake
      2
    • Rod Brind'Amour
      7
    • Chris Chelios
      35
    • Vincent Damphousse
      1
    • Theo Fleury
      3
    • Phil Housley
      3
    • Paul Kariya
      9
    • Alex Mogilny
      12
    • Scott Niedermayer
      51
    • Jeremy Roenick
      11
    • Brendan Shanahan
      46
    • Keith Tkachuk
      8
    • Pierre Turgeon
      2
    • Sergei Zubov
      2
    • Curtis Joseph
      4
    • Mike Vernon
      0
    • PAT BURNS
      37
    • Eric Lindros
      11

Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

40 posts in this topic

Class of 2013 will be announced tomorrow at 3PM. Last year when I made this poll, I assumed Shanahan was such a shoo-in, I didn't even put him in the poll. This year, I think he's a lock, but I'll put him in the poll. Try and pick up to 4 players you think deserve your vote and Pat Burns.

 

New candidates include Blake, Brind'Amour, Chelios, Kariya, Niedermayer, Tkachuk, and Zubov.

 

Edit: Original poll had Eric Lindros missing. Now been added

Edited by devilsrule33

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think adding Lindros may have shifted people's votes around.  It looks like Mogilny and Roenick picked up Shannahan and Nieds votes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think adding Lindros may have shifted people's votes around.  It looks like Mogilny and Roenick picked up Shannahan and Nieds votes

 

Well you are right. I was able to do some fixing around, but it might be off by 1 or 2 as I am not sure if the people who voted Roenick, meant to vote for Niedermayer. That's what I get for being anal and having all the skaters alphabetical. 

Edited by devilsrule33

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He won't get it, but I believe Curtis Joseph deserves the nod more than any of the other players. 943 GP, 454 career wins (more than enough), a 2.79 GAA, a .905 save percentage, 51 shutouts, 63 playoff wins, King Clancy winner and a 3x All-Star - And that's all while playing most of his career with the Blues, Oilers and Maple Leafs. Put him in.

 

Up top I voted for Nieds, Joseph, Shanahan and Turgeon. None of the other players stand out to me - maybe Rod B. Turgeon was a great player - one of the most underrated ever.

Edited by Neb00rs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

burns, chelios, niedermayer, and roenick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Forgot to post my picks.

 

Nieds, Shanny, Chelios were considered easy for me.  Then Housley for being the 4th highest scoring defenseman of all time.  Then Burns for the builder category, which voters get a separate vote for, I believe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He won't get it, but I believe Curtis Joseph deserves the nod more than any of the other players. 943 GP, 454 career wins (more than enough), a 2.79 GAA, a .905 save percentage, 51 shutouts, 63 playoff wins, King Clancy winner and a 3x All-Star - And that's all while playing most of his career with the Blues, Oilers and Maple Leafs. Put him in.

 

Up top I voted for Nieds, Joseph, Shanahan and Turgeon. None of the other players stand out to me - maybe Rod B. Turgeon was a great player - one of the most underrated ever.

 

Interesting that you think the player who won't get in is the most deserving of everyone on the list. I don't really understand that at all. I thought Joseph was an excellent goalie at the beginning of his career in St Louis. but never lived up the hype in Edmonton and Toronto. If Joseph was the goalie that you are hyping him up to me, I think his teams make more than just two trips to the Conference Finals. Those Leafs teams in the late 90s and early 2000s were good enough for one Cup run with some excellent goaltending. They never got it. The HHOF committee is so Toronto bias that if he had one great run with the Leafs, he'd probably get in.

 

Having said that, Is Marty Brodeur all that much better than Curtis Joseph? Are their career numbers and accomplishments just the difference of circumstance? I think he's better, but not that much better than the numbers say. You' won't get many on this board saying it, but it's an interesting discussion, but unfortunately one that has no baring in HHOF discussion. Joseph has 0 Cup appearances and 0 major awards. And as many Vezina trophy winners have shown, you can win this award when you are not on a great team, And many other goalies have shown.  you can lead a non-great team to a Cup run too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like to be the first to congratulate Scott Niedermayer on being elected to the HHOF. What a career. Nieds, Shanny, and Chelios are no-brainers. And hopefully the selection committee does the right thing and puts Burnsie in, is still peeves me he didn't get in while he was still alive. As far as the voting- I went Nieds, Shanny, Chelios, Andreychuk, and Burnsie in the builder category.

Edited by MadDog2020

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shanahan, Niedermayer, Chelios, Lindros were my 4 picks.  Lindros belongs in, dude was ridiculously dominant for about 7 years

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shanahan, Niedermayer, Chelios, Lindros were my 4 picks.  Lindros belongs in, dude was ridiculously dominant for about 7 years

 

I think he might get in tomorrow. And if he doesn't, you'll probably see 100 articles written about how he deserves it. No one can deny Eric Lindros had HHOF talent. He definitely didn't have a typical HHOF career. The main issue will be he played 75 games just once in his career. and 5 seasons over 65 games. He had 7 ridiculously dominant years from 19-26 but only played 471 games in those. It sucks that is Hart Trophy year in 1995 had to happen during the lockout, because his numbers would have been stupid for the season in full-season form, and I think that 3-year stretch would really stand out.

 

The dude was just so good when healthy early in his career. Who knows how these discussions go. It might only take 1 guy on his side to make a good case to convince all the voters. But I think you'll have a ton of these guys penalizing him rightfully, or not. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lindros was one of the few players I remember watching that made you nervous every time he had the puck. Jagr in his prime was another. I don't even put Crosby or Stamkos in that category.

If you had the same rules against head shots back then, Lindros may very well still be playing today.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting that you think the player who won't get in is the most deserving of everyone on the list. I don't really understand that at all. I thought Joseph was an excellent goalie at the beginning of his career in St Louis. but never lived up the hype in Edmonton and Toronto. If Joseph was the goalie that you are hyping him up to me, I think his teams make more than just two trips to the Conference Finals. Those Leafs teams in the late 90s and early 2000s were good enough for one Cup run with some excellent goaltending. They never got it. The HHOF committee is so Toronto bias that if he had one great run with the Leafs, he'd probably get in.

 

Having said that, Is Marty Brodeur all that much better than Curtis Joseph? Are their career numbers and accomplishments just the difference of circumstance? I think he's better, but not that much better than the numbers say. You' won't get many on this board saying it, but it's an interesting discussion, but unfortunately one that has no baring in HHOF discussion. Joseph has 0 Cup appearances and 0 major awards. And as many Vezina trophy winners have shown, you can win this award when you are not on a great team, And many other goalies have shown.  you can lead a non-great team to a Cup run too.

 

That was kinda the crux of my argument: bounced around and never won big - so probably will be overlooked. I don't thing Cup wins are necessarily the measure of a player, but there's just...that stigma. 454 wins as a goalie - that's good for 4th all-time. The five goalies behind Joseph are all in the HOF. Let's not pretend that's not HOF worthy. Joseph put up all-time numbers, and never had a powerhouse in front of him. Marty is better in my mind but he can't say that.

Edited by Neb00rs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who do I think goes in? Nieds, Chelios, Shanny, and Roenick

 

Who would I like to see go in? Nieds, Shanny, Zubov, and Andreychuk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting that you think the player who won't get in is the most deserving of everyone on the list. I don't really understand that at all. I thought Joseph was an excellent goalie at the beginning of his career in St Louis. but never lived up the hype in Edmonton and Toronto. If Joseph was the goalie that you are hyping him up to me, I think his teams make more than just two trips to the Conference Finals. Those Leafs teams in the late 90s and early 2000s were good enough for one Cup run with some excellent goaltending. They never got it. The HHOF committee is so Toronto bias that if he had one great run with the Leafs, he'd probably get in.

Having said that, Is Marty Brodeur all that much better than Curtis Joseph? Are their career numbers and accomplishments just the difference of circumstance? I think he's better, but not that much better than the numbers say. You' won't get many on this board saying it, but it's an interesting discussion, but unfortunately one that has no baring in HHOF discussion. Joseph has 0 Cup appearances and 0 major awards. And as many Vezina trophy winners have shown, you can win this award when you are not on a great team, And many other goalies have shown. you can lead a non-great team to a Cup run too.

That was kinda the crux of my argument: bounced around and never won big - so probably will be overlooked. I don't thing Cup wins are necessarily the measure of a player, but there's just...that stigma. 454 wins as a goalie - that's good for 4th all-time. The five goalies behind Joseph are all in the HOF. Let's not pretend that's not HOF worthy. Joseph put up all-time numbers, and never had a powerhouse in front of him. Marty is better in my mind but he can't say that.

He played for good teams, although maybe not powerhouses.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was always such a fan of Kariya, i loved watching his speed..Tkachuk too. i would love to see him them get in, but the chances aren't the best.

 

Chelios, Nieds, Roenick, Shanahan,  Lindros should get in

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shanahan, Niedermayer, Chelios, Lindros were my 4 picks.  Lindros belongs in, dude was ridiculously dominant for about 7 years

 

Lindros is a tough one for me, but the guy clearly had H-O-F talent...no one could dispute that.

 

His offensive numbers were quite impressive for someone whose career started at the tail end of the Live Puck Era:

 

Reached 300 points in 210 GP (4th fastest in NHL history)

Reached 400 points in 277 GP (4th fastest)

Reached 500 points in 352 GP (5th fastest)

Reached 600 points in 429 GP (6th fastest)

 

From '92-'93 to '99-'00, he played in 558 games and put up 327 goals and 405 assists for 732 points.  Over an 82-game season, that's an average of 48 goals and 60 assists.  This is impressive stuff, especially for the era he played in. 

 

From then on, the numbers dropped off considerably:  202 GP, 45 G, 88 A, 133 Pts, and he played in just 121 games in his last three seasons combined. 

 

The $1,000,000 question:  is the '92-'93 to '99-'00 stretch dominant enough (short-term dominance) on its own to merit him getting in, despite the many missed games?  What sucks about Lindros is, even with the success he DID enjoy, there will always be a "what could've been" feeling with him.  

 

I forget why he retired...did he just have absolutely nothing left?  Just felt it was simply too risky to his health?  He was relatively young when he left the game (34 years old I think). 

 

I think I would probably put him in under the short-term dominance category, though because of all of the missed games, he just barely gets in for me.  If he had stuck around, who knows, maybe he could've reached some eye-friendly milestones (like 400 goals and 1000 points), but what would've been the point?  Lindros was clearly never going to be Lindros again, and he did the right thing in leaving when he did for the sake of his health...a few years of shell-of-himself compiling would've seemed counterproductive.  If one chooses to vote Lindros in, I think he's got to do it based on '92-'93 to '99-'00 and on that stretch alone.       

Edited by Colorado Rockies 1976

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting that you think the player who won't get in is the most deserving of everyone on the list. I don't really understand that at all. I thought Joseph was an excellent goalie at the beginning of his career in St Louis. but never lived up the hype in Edmonton and Toronto. If Joseph was the goalie that you are hyping him up to me, I think his teams make more than just two trips to the Conference Finals. Those Leafs teams in the late 90s and early 2000s were good enough for one Cup run with some excellent goaltending. They never got it. The HHOF committee is so Toronto bias that if he had one great run with the Leafs, he'd probably get in.

 

Having said that, Is Marty Brodeur all that much better than Curtis Joseph? Are their career numbers and accomplishments just the difference of circumstance? I think he's better, but not that much better than the numbers say. You' won't get many on this board saying it, but it's an interesting discussion, but unfortunately one that has no baring in HHOF discussion. Joseph has 0 Cup appearances and 0 major awards. And as many Vezina trophy winners have shown, you can win this award when you are not on a great team, And many other goalies have shown.  you can lead a non-great team to a Cup run too.

 

Joseph is the ultimate compiler.  The guy was consistently pretty good and usually healthy for a long time.  But clearly never a guy who dominated or felt unbeatable to opponents. 

 

There's two schools of thought on the compiling types:  the fans who feel that a guy who never really dominated his sport isn't H-O-F worthy, and the others who think that a guy who managed to be pretty good for such a long time (when so many careers are short) deserves to get in.

 

To me, Cujo is like the starting pitcher who has a bunch of 14-11 and 15-10 type seasons, yet does is for so long that he quietly manages to win 300 games...then suddenly you're saying to yourself, "Well, yeah, he wasn't really that great, but the guy did win 300 games..."

 

That's kind of how I feel about Joseph...he played in a hell of a lot of games (943), which pretty much dictates he was going to win at least 400 by default.  I don't know if the 454 wins is really that big of a deal (I think goalie wins are a little overrated anyway.  Play on a good team, and you'll get your fair share of wins even if you're merely decent.  Play on a bad team, and your record will suffer accordingly, even if you're terrific.) 

 

I think if Cujo does get in, it will be for longevity and the win total that came with it.  No matter how I look at him, I think, "Pretty good for a long time."  I don't know if pretty good does it for me. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lindros is a tough one for me, but the guy clearly had H-O-F talent...no one could dispute that.

 

His offensive numbers were quite impressive for some whose career started at the tail end of the Live Puck Era:

 

Reached 300 points in 210 GP (4th fastest in NHL history)

Reached 400 points in 277 GP (4th fastest)

Reached 500 points in 352 GP (5th fastest)

Reached 600 points in 429 GP (6th fastest)

 

From '92-'93 to '99-'00, he played in 558 games and put up 327 goals and 405 assists for 732 points.  Over an 82-game season, that's an average of 48 goals and 60 assists.  This is impressive stuff, especially for the era he played in. 

 

From then on, the numbers dropped off considerably:  202 GP, 45 G, 88 A, 133 Pts, and he played in just 121 games in his last three seasons combined. 

 

The $1,000,000 question:  is the '92-'93 to '99-'00 stretch dominant enough (short-term dominance) on its own to merit him getting in, despite the many missed games?  What sucks about Lindros is, even with the success he DID enjoy, there will always be a "what could've been" feeling with him.  

 

I forget why he retired...did he just have absolutely nothing left?  Just felt it was simply too risky to his health?  He was relatively young when he left the game (34 years old I think). 

 

I think I would probably put him in under the short-term dominance category, though because of all of the missed games, he just barely gets in for me.  If he had stuck around, who knows, maybe he could've reached some eye-friendly milestones (like 400 goals and 1000 points), but what would've been the point?  Lindros was clearly never going to be Lindros again, and he did the right thing in leaving when he did for the sake of his health...a few years of shell-of-himself compiling would've seemed counterproductive.  If one chooses to vote Lindros in, I think he's got to do it based on '92-'93 to '99-'00 and on that stretch alone.       

 

This is why I think Lindros playing a few more full seasons would help his case as people look at total numbers per season more than P/GP. The P/GP had him ranked as follows:

93-94: 3

94-95: 1 

95-96: 3

96-97: 2

97-98: 6

98-99: 4

99-00: 9

 

Pavel Bure had those full seasons where you could say 5-time 50 goal scorer or 4-time 58+ scorer. But the reality is Lindros and Bure played a similar amount of games. 

 

Bure: 779 points in 702 games (1.11p/gp)

Lindros: 865 points in 760 games (1.14/gp)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lindros' P/GP during his '92-'93 to '99-'00 was up there (1.31).  The '99-'00 season actually brings that average down a little bit.  I'm guessing he had to be in the top five for that stretch. 

 

But I hear what you're saying dr33...the missed games hurt Lindros in that he usually couldn't put up eye-popping monster point totals (but still averaged 81.3 points on an average of 62 GP per season in the '92-'00 time frame). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lindros's holdout on the Nordiques is probably what cost him - would'va had an extra year in the NHL, probably a 60-70 point one.  But you can't have Neely and Lafontaine in and Lindros not in, it's just a sham at that point.  He is right up there with the greatest players in the game for short-term dominance.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still feel Mike Richter should be in as the most-accomplished US-Born keeper...winning Stanley Cup, World Cup, Olympic Silver, All-Stars etc.   

 

Nieds is a lock this year, Modano is the lock next year.

 

As for the rest of this year, Shanahan, and Chelios may go in.  Blake is possible but I think Moginly is more deserving due to his defection and how it got the ball rolling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lindros's holdout on the Nordiques is probably what cost him - would'va had an extra year in the NHL, probably a 60-70 point one.  But you can't have Neely and Lafontaine in and Lindros not in, it's just a sham at that point.  He is right up there with the greatest players in the game for short-term dominance.  

 

Forget those two...how could the exact same committee vote Pavel Bure in the season before and not Lindros. Wouldn't make much sense. Of course what you are saying...wouldn't make much sense either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Neids, Shanahan, Chelios are locks. I would love to see Pat Burns finally, and I would like to see Mogilny instead of Chelios for supreme Devils dominance lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0