| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| nashvillepreds |
Posted - 12/07/2007 : 06:53:20
Should Rob Brind'amour make the hockey hall of fame? He's a great player and a leader but definitely not as good as most of the guys he'll be facing to enter. Do you think he should make it?
Ellis or Mason?
Go Preds Go! |
| 25 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Guest7418 |
Posted - 12/10/2007 : 10:48:01
I don't think he'll get in, or deserves to get it, but I would certainly argue that he's not anywhere close to being 'Far from HHOF material'... I think that that is just a little close-minded. |
| Guest8372 |
Posted - 12/10/2007 : 07:22:39
quote:
Originally posted by PuckNuts
Oh, and to stay on topic Brind'Amour is far from HHOF material...
Far??? How far and why??
He is a defensive specialist that can put up points. As previously mentioned Gainey is in, why not Rod? |
| PuckNuts |
Posted - 12/09/2007 : 18:41:16
Do you know why Canada is good at hockey, and not basketball, baseball, soccer, and cricket?
That is because we all play hockey first...
The US will be better than Canada in hockey one day, if you think not then you are not looking at the big picture. (by the way we have lost to them in the past).
I said to a friend of mine, and my son that we needed to win the Olympic gold medal when we did because the other countries are getting better, and one day we will not be the dominating country that we all "think" we are...
We have coaches coaching other countries, we have players playing in other countries, it is a matter of time, as we pass all that knowledge on, we only weeken ourselves...
Oh, and to stay on topic Brind'Amour is far from HHOF material...
I don't necessarily agree with everything I say.
- - Marshall McLuhan
|
| Beans15 |
Posted - 12/08/2007 : 13:32:02
Wow, are you joking?? Seriously. That someone can say that players in the league today could hold a candle to those playing in the 70's and 80's is a complete joke. The weakest players in the league would be 1st liners?? Sure, guys like Boogaard and Tootoo are head and shoulders above Gretzky, Kurri, Anderson, Messier, Lemiuex, Bossy, Trottier, LaFleur, Orr, Esposito,,,,,,,,,I could keep going for a long time. That statement should have been a joke.
Most 3rd and all 4th line players in the league today would never had seen the NHL in the 70's and 80's. Seriously, just looking at the math alone, there were 14 teams through the better part of the 70's and 21 through the better part of the 80's. That is between 320 and 480 players(based on 23 per team). Just to this point this year, there has been 722 different skaters and 70 different goalies and we are only half way through the season. That means it wouldn't be a shock to see 800 players through 2007. Looking at that, if you take the entire 2007 player list to 1975, maybe 1/3 see the ice, and in the 80's barely half.
On the other point, I never said anything about Rod's offensive performance. I just said that 0.84 is not enough to get him in alone. And close to 500 goals?? He would have to keep his career average for another 3 seasons after this one to get to 500. I don't think he is going to play that long.
And finally, I never knew that reputation got you into the HOF? It's not like Rod is doing things that no one else is or hasn't done before. If work in the community and being an upstanding citizen got you into the Hall, Georges Laraque will be in for sure!
Wayne or Bobby?? How about both!!! |
| Guest4462 |
Posted - 12/08/2007 : 12:00:06
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
0.84 doesn't get you into the Hall. If you are looking at offensive stats alone, it appears you need 500+ goals, 1000+ points, or over a point a game if you played less than 1000 games.
oh.. and btw... Rod will get close to 500 goals and he already has over 1000 points... i'm not saying he's in, but he certainly is going to get some consideration.
And as the other guys said (and seem to be ignored), Rod is a model citizen and good person... that's why he will easily get the nod long before the likes of Anderson or Ciccerelli ever do... The hall has a reputation to consider.... |
| Guest4462 |
Posted - 12/08/2007 : 11:47:07
Let's get real.
The talent pool nowadays, with fresh talent being injected from every corner of the globe, FAR exceeds that of any previous decade. The weakest players in todays' game would be first-liners 2-3 decades ago. Their skating abilities, shots, fitness, and the entire package is just so much better. Superstars and stars are in a different category no matter when you look at them, and it's a lot harder to be a superstar today, simply because the relative talent distance from you to all your peers is not as large as it used to be. The biggest differences nowadays are subtle... and you get more points because you are 'slightly' better, stronger, faster which in turn pushes your coach to give you more ice-time and hence more opportunties. Don't discount how your ice-time affects your stats - there are plenty of players with a lot more offensive talent than some of the stars of today's game that will never be thought of as stars simply because the coach never plays them (for whatever reason... defensive liability... attitude... work ethic... whatever...)
|
| Beans15 |
Posted - 12/08/2007 : 11:29:32
Just because the talent pool is deeper, doesn't mean it's better. There are 300+ million people in the United States and there are island nations, such as Cuba(11 million people) and Puerto Rico (3.7 million people) that compete and beat the American in baseball. Isn't baseball America's sport?? Same with football (soccer for some of you), there are small nations that are some of the best.
Regardless, I still think that the league is watered down and there are players today that would not have had a hope in hell of making a squad in the 80's.
Think of how competative and exciting a league the NHL would be if the disolved the 6 lowest financial markets. Take those players and draft to the remaining 24 teams. That would remove at least 100 weak players from the league. Above that, it would concentrate the highly skilled players so that more teams would have more talented players. Above this, drafting players would be better as there would be fewer teams drafting, and more likely teams could remain good by not having those 6 players per draft round.
That is what I mean when I said bottom of the barrell in regards to Brind'Amour getting into the HOF. In 10 years, this watered down league will have players retiring.
Wayne or Bobby?? How about both!!! |
| willus3 |
Posted - 12/08/2007 : 10:08:23
And now I think we're getting to the bottom of this.
It may be as Pucknuts says all the kids are moving to the big city. My thought is that there may indeed be more kids playing and therefore in theory a larger talent pool, but I don't believe those kids are playing with the same passion and love for it that they used to.
And you're right Beans, I'm not on the larger talent pool side of things but I haven't figured out how to disprove the theory yet.
"I'm a man of principle... or not. Whatever the situation calls for." - Alan Shore |
| PuckNuts |
Posted - 12/07/2007 : 15:50:19
They moved to the big city...
I don't necessarily agree with everything I say.
- - Marshall McLuhan
|
| Greg Smith |
Posted - 12/07/2007 : 15:11:54
Rinks in Ponoka: 5
In the 70's: 10
what happened to all the little boys skating around in jeans and styrofoam? Now there aren't even half the guys that played back in the 70's, and Canada has gotten bigger!
|
| PuckNuts |
Posted - 12/07/2007 : 14:56:19
It is a good point Beans, but how many children played hockey in the 60's, compared to today, I am going to guess a minimum of 10 times more...
A quick count of arenas in the city of London is 22.
In the 1960's 5...
I don't necessarily agree with everything I say.
- - Marshall McLuhan
|
| Beans15 |
Posted - 12/07/2007 : 14:45:06
I'm pretty sure that you are not "a lot of people."
And to those who still not see my point, consider that when the league expanded in '78, it went to 21 teams. With a roster of 20 skaters plus 3 in the press box, that would mean there were approx. 480 players in the league.
Today, with 30 teams, plus the fact there are players that are boardline NHLer's today that bounce between the minors and the big club, there are more than like 26ish players on 30 teams, meaning 780 players.
That means there are 300 more players in the league than there were in the 80's and early 90's. Even consider the 12 teams it went to in 67, there are 500 more players in the league today than back then.
It's not that the talent pool is deeper, it's that the standards for "talented" hockey players is lower now than it was in the past.
Wayne or Bobby?? How about both!!! |
| willus3 |
Posted - 12/07/2007 : 14:38:53
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
My bottom of the barrell comment was directed towards players coming into the league in the past 5 years. My opinion is that with the number of teams out there, there are more players in the league today than 15+ years ago. I think that there are literally 100 players in the league today that would not have been able to play in the league before expansion. That being said, 10 years from now, the caliber of players retiring and being eligable for the HHOF will be of a lower class than previous times.
You know a lot of people would disagree with you on this Beans. They would say that the talent pool has grown so much that the available talent is better than it has ever been. 
"I'm a man of principle... or not. Whatever the situation calls for." - Alan Shore |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 12/07/2007 : 13:53:35
My bottom of the barrell comment was directed towards players coming into the league in the past 5 years. My opinion is that with the number of teams out there, there are more players in the league today than 15+ years ago. I think that there are literally 100 players in the league today that would not have been able to play in the league before expansion. That being said, 10 years from now, the caliber of players retiring and being eligable for the HHOF will be of a lower class than previous times.
And as far as my comment on 0.84 points per game, make sure you are reading posts clearly. I said that OFFENSIVELY speaking, 0.84 is not HOF caliber. I never said anything about Brind'Amour's defensive ability, which is definately solid.
Wayne or Bobby?? How about both!!! |
| hkalirah |
Posted - 12/07/2007 : 13:43:30
I just don't see it happening. The other guy said it right, if Dino and Glen Anderson aren't in then what makes anyone thing Brindamour should be in?
It would have to be a really weak year.
I'll add a couple of other names to Greg's list, how about Shanahan, Jagr's getting up there, Kovalev, Federov. All these guys have had better careers than Brindamour.
Go Wings Go! |
| Guest8372 |
Posted - 12/07/2007 : 13:41:38
quote:
Originally posted by Greg Smith
Brind'Amour will be elligible at the time that Sakic, Neidermayer, Pronger, Sundin, Lidstrom, Schneider and Hasek will. I don't see him getting in very quickly, if he does get obducted.
Wait a minute Greg. My guess is that Rod will retire within 2-3 years.
Sakic - likely retires in 2-3 years
Nieds - likely retires end of this season if not next just because he has done it all not because he is old.
Pronger - he is only 33?
Sundin - yep probably retire at the same time as Rod in about 2-3 years
Lidstrom - may will retire in 2-3 years but I see him pulling a Chelios
Chelios - will retire in 1-2 years but you never know he might pull a Howe.
Schneider - is not HHOF material no matter how you measure it up. He is good but not hall material. Please state your case why he is, because I don't see it.
Hasek - done this season
There is also:
Fedorov - likely to return to Russia soon this year if not next.
Jagr - probably in 2-3 years but I wouldn't bet on it. He is still spritely at 35.
So based on the above, Rod is likely up against, Sakic, Sundin, Lidstrom, Chelios and Fedorov. That's a tough grouping, but depending when these guys retire, there is going to be one tough group and one pretty easy group. |
| Berniefan4life |
Posted - 12/07/2007 : 13:24:43
As a flyers fan he gets my vote... I love to watch him play even for the Canes. He plays with his heart...plus he plays in the corners where the action is.
I agree, he will make it but it will take some time...
As for the bottom of the barrel comment. If anyone is inducted into HHOF, its an honour. END of comment.
Flyers Fan since age 5 |
| Greg Smith |
Posted - 12/07/2007 : 13:07:11
Brind'Amour will be elligible at the time that Sakic, Neidermayer, Pronger, Sundin, Lidstrom, Schneider and Hasek will. I don't see him getting in very quickly, if he does get obducted. |
| Guest8372 |
Posted - 12/07/2007 : 13:03:14
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
0.84 doesn't get you into the Hall. If you are looking at offensive stats alone, it appears you need 500+ goals, 1000+ points, or over a point a game if you played less than 1000 games.
True if he was purely an offensive threat. However he is a two time Selke winner (at the age of 35 and 36 no less) and a candidate every year. If Gainey (less than 0.5PPG) is in the HHOF without the stats above, then shouldn't Roddy be in at least considered? I'll accept that he is not a shoo in but still pretty compelling.
As for Pucknuts, Dino and Glenn have umm personal demons that caused them to be overlooked by the Hall. Rod is a model citizen. |
| nashvillepreds |
Posted - 12/07/2007 : 12:17:21
Brind'Amour isn't a points guy, he's a leader by example. He comes through when it counts and possibly caused the Hurricanes to win the cup. I don't think he should make it either, just I heard a few people talking about this and thought it would make an interesting topic.
Ellis or Mason?
Go Preds Go! |
| PuckNuts |
Posted - 12/07/2007 : 11:06:44
With players like Glenn Anderson, and Dino Ciccarelli, still not in the hall, I find it hard to put Brind'Amour in.
I don't necessarily agree with everything I say.
- - Marshall McLuhan
|
| Beans15 |
Posted - 12/07/2007 : 10:57:00
quote:
Originally posted by Guest8372
quote:
Originally posted by nashvillepreds
Should Rob Brind'amour make the hockey hall of fame? He's a great player and a leader but definitely not as good as most of the guys he'll be facing to enter. Do you think he should make it?
There is no way this guy will ever make it into the HHOF.
His brother Rod though, is likely to get in. Consistent performer (0.84points per game lifetime). Always considered for the Selke. Stanley cup ring. Probably end up top 30-40 in scoring all time.
I didn't catch that. Man did that make me laugh.
0.84 doesn't get you into the Hall. If you are looking at offensive stats alone, it appears you need 500+ goals, 1000+ points, or over a point a game if you played less than 1000 games.
Seems to be the the "unwritten" standard. I don't see Brind'Amour as a shoe in after his 3 years. Looking at the league in the past 5 years, there are fewer and fewer HOF caliber type players getting into the league lately. He might make it in down the road when they start to scrape the bottom of the barrel.
Wayne or Bobby?? How about both!!! |
| Guest8372 |
Posted - 12/07/2007 : 10:44:05
quote:
Originally posted by nashvillepreds
Should Rob Brind'amour make the hockey hall of fame? He's a great player and a leader but definitely not as good as most of the guys he'll be facing to enter. Do you think he should make it?
There is no way this guy will ever make it into the HHOF.
His brother Rod though, is likely to get in. Consistent performer (0.84points per game lifetime). Always considered for the Selke. Stanley cup ring. Probably end up top 30-40 in scoring all time. |
| PuckNuts |
Posted - 12/07/2007 : 10:20:43
You can not just let any player into the HHOF, it is reserved for the best players to play the game.
Brind'Amour has been a good play, not a great player, and as Beans said your about five seasons too early...
I don't necessarily agree with everything I say.
- - Marshall McLuhan
|
| Beans15 |
Posted - 12/07/2007 : 09:42:39
I'm thinking maybe let the guy finish his career and then wait the three years. This conversation is about 5 years premature.
Wayne or Bobby?? How about both!!! |
|
|
