HOCKEY HALL OF FAME TO ANNOUNCE 2016 INDUCTEES
The Hockey Hall of Fame selection committee will make its choices today for the induction class of 2016. In a year with no likely first-time-eligible candidates to earn selection, the selections will come from candidates who have failed previously to gain enough votes for induction.
This year, a slew of former Flyers are among the most prominent names up for consideration: The list includes Mark Recchi (a virtual shoo-in this time), Eric Lindros, Jeremy Roenick and Rod Brind'Amour. Pat Quinn may have a shot in the "Builder" category.
Top candidates with no Flyers ties during their careers include KLM line forward Sergei Makarov, sniper Alexander Mogilny, offensively dynamic Paul Kariya, power forward Dave Andreychuk, feisty little scoring winger Theo Fleury and goalies Curtis Joseph and Chris Osgood.
Annually, there is a mandated maximum of four male inductees from the player category (plus a maximum of two female inductees), two builders or one referee/linesman,
Ex-Flyer Vaclav Prospal, who broke into the league in the Philadelphia organization and later had a second stint as a rental player for the 2008 stretch drive and playoffs, is among the first-year nominees. Other first-year candidates include defenseman Roman Hamrlik, goalie Miikka Kiprusoff and forward Milan Hejduk.
For candidates not selected this year, the road gets tougher next year. Teemu Selänne is a lock to be selected in his first year of eligibility. While not a lock for first-year selection, Daniel Alfredsson will add another prominent name to a crowded field of candidates.
In order to be selected, a candidate must receive at least 75 percent of the vote (at least 14 votes) among the 18-person Hockey Hall of Fame selection committee. The current committee is as follows: John Davidson (chairman), Jim Gregory (non-voting, chair emeritus), Scotty Bowman, David Branch, Brian Burke, Colin Campbell, Bob Clarke, Marc de Foy, Eric Duhatschek, Michael Farber, Ron Francis, Mike Gartner, Anders Hedberg, Jari Kurri, Igor Larionov, Bob McKenzie, David Poile, Luc Robitaille, and Bill Torrey.
The selection committee is instructed to consider the following criteria when selecting player candidates for the Hall: "
Playing ability, sportsmanship, character and contributions to his or her team or teams and to the game of hockey in general."
For Recchi, the 2016 vote is his third crack at the Hall. The Lindros candidacy is up for the sixth time. The unlikelihood of any first-tine candidates getting in plus changes in the selection committee -- some old-guard types who would not have voted for Lindros under any circumstances (and had some fodder to keep him out) have been replaced by others who are more likely to weigh all of the merits and limitations of his candidacy.
For all of his vehement differences with Lindros during the latter portion of Lindros' Flyers career, year-long standoff and eventual trade to the New York Rangers, Clarke has always been able to considered Lindros' candidacy based solely on the caliber of player he was. Clarke has always supported Lindros' candidacy for the Hall, and voiced it publicly when asked. While the two men will never be close, Clarke has gotten over his feelings about Lindros (in large part because he doesn't have to deal anymore with Carl and Bonnie Lindros) while Lindros has put aside his differences with the Flyers and embraced his legacy as an iconic player of the 1990s.
Nevertheless, not every candidacy is free of politics and personality clashes. It only takes five non-selections on the committee to block a candidate and, despite the secrecy around the process, rumors leak out about who may have stumped for or against certain candidates.
For example, it has been alleged, whether true or not, that the number one reason why prolific NHL referee and longtime South Jersey resident Kerry Fraser is not in the Hall of Fame is his late-career and post-career openness about the way the contemporary NHL runs its officiating. Former boss Colin Campbell dislikes him.
In Lindros' case, the frequent injuries, sitting out the entire 1991-92 and 2000-01 seasons while waiting to be traded respectively by the Quebec Nordiques and Flyers, the gradual but steady decline in his play after his departure from the Flyers, the "no Cup ring" argument and debates over how much team distractions that arose around him were offset by his frequent on-ice dominance when healthy have all given fodder for detractors to say he does not belong in the Hall. In the past, the selection committee has overlooked injury-curtailed careers for the likes of Cam Neely, Pavel Bure and Peter Forsberg to reward their dominance when they were on the ice.
Recchi has simply had the misfortune of going up against some of toughest fields of Hall of Fame candidates the last few years. Many of his best seasons came during his two stints with the Flyers. Longevity both helps and hurts his candidacy for different reasons. Recchi bounced around the NHL after 2004 and his productivity was no longer what it once was, which pushed down his points-per-game average. On the other hand, he proved his durability as a small player in what became a big man's game for a significant portion of his career.
Just as important, Recchi added two more Stanley Cup rings to his resume. Even though the Cup is a team honor -- and really should not reflect on any individual player, unless one wants to argue that the likes of Gartner, Marcel Dionne and Dale Hawerchuk really should not be in the Hall solely because they were never on a Cup winner -- it does carry weight with voters.
Longevity helps Brind'Amour's candidacy, as does the "complete player" argument and his legendary commitment to conditioning and reputation for leadership. He also got a Cup ring in the latter part of his career. What works against him is that he was never considered among the game's superstar offensive players at any point of his career and his career offensive productivity stats, while often well above-average on a league-wide basis and just part of what made him such an effective player, fall short of those of most candidates who get elected.
Roenick is a bit of a controversial candidate in his own right. There are some within the game who are vehement that he belongs in the "big" Hall as well as the U.S. Hall, for which he was a shoo-in. They consider the nine-time NHL All-Star Game participant to be one of the sport's ultimate competitors on top of being a 500-plus goal scorer and, undeniably, one of the top U.S. born players and someone who proudly carries the torch for the growth of American hockey since 1980.
However, Roenick's colorful and outspoken personality, an talk-first-and-think-later episodes have rubbed some the wrong way. Of greater substance for the anti-candidacy debate are the facts that Roenick never won a Cup, never reached 80 points again after his back-to-back 100-point seasons (1992-93 and 1993-94) prior to the NHL's league-wide scoring decline and never scored more than 27 goals again over the final seven seasons of his career. The flip side of that argument is that Recchi "only" had one 90-plus point season and two 80-plus point seasons during the NHL's so-called Dead Puck era.
Personally, I believe that it not fair to judge players stats relative to anything else but what was going on leaguewide while he was playing. Recchi and Roenick both remained effective offensive players in a very tough era to do so. It's not just about raw numbers.
People talk about how, following 1995, the Devils' and Jacques Lemaire's version of the neutral zone trap proving to be a negative turning point for scoring around the NHL. It was, but what really accelerated the scoring decline was when hockey organizations not just leaguewide but worldwide saw a modestly talented Florida Panthers team reached the 1996 Cup Final.
After the Panthers beat stacked and highly favored pre-series Flyers and Penguins teams in the 1996 playoffs -- and then, within a few years, the NHL expanded all the way to 30 teams -- scoring plummeted. It was cast as a great Cinderella story at the time but it gave birth to a lot of frustrating, dull hockey.
The Panthers won the Eastern Conference through a good goalie and a very defensive system. In practical terms often meant constant clutch-and-grab tactics (especially stick holding), reliance on scratching out a couple goals and otherwise just clogging things up defensively and frequent icings when leading or tied in the third period (before the NHL instituted the no line-change rule). It was ugly hockey to watch, but it worked for the Panthers that season.
In the meantime, the Devils eventually had multiple Cups to show for their keep-the-score-low style of play that the Lou Lamoriello-constructed teams played better than any other team in the NHL. No team adhered to structure better than the New Jersey teams of that era.
To me, the fact that players such as Recchi and Roenick were still able to assert themselves as effective NHL offensive players is a testament to how good they really were. Apart from what was going on around the league, keep in mind that they were also part of a team system. The Flyers clubs coached by Ken Hitchcock (both players) and Roger Neilson (Recchi) were built around a foundation of playing in a highly prescribed way without the puck before there was leeway for creative reign offensively if and when the ice finally did open up and they had the puck on their stick.
It's not an easy way to play for offense-geared players yet they both managed to do so. There was also a context of injuries -- such as Roenick's broken jaw and concussion issues that he rarely conceded to lest he have been forced to exit the lineup when he probably should not have been trying to play -- and the adjustments that even great players have to make by their 30s if they are to remain effective players.
It will be interesting to see whom the HHOF committee announces as its selections. If I had to make a prediction, I would say Recchi, Kariya, Makarov (for his many international career merits and pair of 30-goal NHL seasons and averaging north of a point-per-game in his first three NHL seasons after coming to North America at age 31) and one of Lindros or Mogilny gets in this year.
However, cases could be made for pretty much any of the aforementioned repeat nominees, including Roenick, Brind'Amour and Andreychuk. None would be unfitting selections.
I do not expect any of this year's first-time nominees to earn induction now or in the foreseeable future, despite their longevity and good overall careers. Hejduk in particular was underrated for his own abilities largely because he played on teams where Joe Sakic and Forsberg were the focal-point players.
THE BELLOWS DEBATE
Ever since the Flyers traded down from the 18th to 22nd overall pick in the first round of the 2016 Draft on Friday, there has been a lively debate over the decision to bypass the chance to select Kieffer Bellows, Julien Gauthier or Max Jones (twice). It seems like the most outrage is over Bellows.
First of all, the Flyers ended up with TWO first-round caliber draft prospects -- German Rubtsov and 36th overall pick Pascal Laberge -- rather than just Bellows. In and of itself, that makes the decision to trade down pretty much a no-brainer on the spot when there really wasn't a big ratings gap between two very different style players. I'm not sure why a segment of the fan base and my media colleagues cannot see that.
Also, the Flyers for years, but especially now with Ron Hextall as the general manager, draft based on whomever they feel is the best available player in the first round. Not the player who best fits a specific and immediate team need. Not the best available shooter. Not the fastest available skater. Not the biggest-framed or most physical available player whom they figure will have an NHL career. They go for the player whom they feel has the best array of assets they can project to the NHL level. It's nothing new and the Flyers aren't about to change the philosophy.
I strongly suspect that, as the first round unfolded, the Flyers also gave some thought to scenarios about what they would do if a defenseman or two continued to drop even though they were going to take a forward unless there was a line of demarcation in the "tier" grouping of how they viewed the still-available pool of players.
As soon as the Flyers announced the trade-down from pick 18 to 22, it was pretty clear-cut that Rubtsov was the player they were going to take unless another team surprised them by taking the Russian forward. Trading down four spots meant that Bellows (pretty much for certain) and at least one of Gauthier or Jones would be off the board by 22nd overall, even with the Jets' hearts set on massive OHL shutdown defenseman Logan Stanley. If the Flyers had truly coveted Bellows (or Gauthier), they would have taken him with the 18th pick and not moved down, even with the temptation of an early 2nd round pick. Likewise, if there was not a Plan B in place if Rubtsov was off the board, they also probably would have used the 18th pick.
The "Hextall gambled and lost" crowd that thinks Philly was aiming for anyone other than whom they took really does not understand how cautious Hextall truly is about taking gambles or how committed he and Chris Pryor are to their assessments. Whether those assessments are proven right will remain to be seen over time, but just remember to judge it based on the big picture and the long-haul and not on the very narrow picture of how many goals Bellows may score.
I discussed the Rubtsov selection in depth in
Saturday's blog. Apart from saying that there's a case to be made for him being the better fit for today's puck possession oriented NHL and particularly for Hextall and Dave Hakstol's desired vision of the team. I will not repeat what I wrote but will add some more thoughts on him in the next section of today's blog.
Here's the thing about Bellows: Perhaps he will develop a more complete game over time. Right now, though, he's a first-round pick mostly on the basis of his shooting ability. He can be feisty, too, but even that needs to be channeled better because he takes a lot of bad penalties.
Bellows is, at present, not a dynamic skater (although not deficient), not a two-way player, and is going to need a lot of offensive zone starts and power play time to put up the goal numbers that will be expected and not a player who will particularly help make others on his line better. Get him the puck in scoring position with an open shot -- tough to get in today's ever-so-structured NHL -- and he will put it in the net, or at least force the goaltender to make a good save.
Here's the concern: Right now, he's looking at a tall order to thrive in a league where it's mighty tough to score no matter how good your shot is. Bellows is going to have to score a LOT of goals to be successful in the NHL.
To do that, he's going to need a high-end playmaker on his line, which should not be a problem in New York. It should also be said that Bellows can create some of his own scoring chances, but will is unlikely to ever rival someone such as Jeff Carter in that regard. At least early in his career, Bellows is also going to need a coach who can live with his limitations and not start making him a healthy scratch if he's not playing 200 feet and he's also not putting enough pucks in the net to justify it. Being successful as an offensive specialist is something that relatively few players in the current day game can manage to do.
Is it possible that Bellows could do it? Yes.
But a better-odds scenario for the long haul would be to see him diversify his game a little more. Bellows has work to do to help an NHL team in other ways during the inevitable stretches when pucks simply aren't going in for him, for whatever reason.
Bellows is an offensive talent, yes. But the true catalyst on his USNTDP line, and the player more likely to project eventually posting hefty NHL point totals despite a lack of size, is playmaking center Clayton Keller. He was a player worth considering trading up to select and it was not a surprise he went seventh overall to Arizona despite being a little out of the top 10 in many of the published rankings. Keller was ranked down a bit pretty much solely because he's a small-frame player in a draft that had players with a size-and-skill combo at the very top. Keller, however, has the potential to make anyone he plays with better because of his playmaking acumen. Even without Keller, Bellows would have scored his share of goals but it was his chemistry with the playmaking center that made his finishing ability stand out.
Finally, and not insignificantly, the Flyers are not the only NHL organization that tends to give a talented natural center the nod in their scouting ratings above a talented natural winger. The belief is to build through the middle -- centers, defensemen and goalies being the backbone with quality wingers to round it out. It's a rule of thumb, not an absolute.
Craig Button, now a TSN draft pundit and a former NHL scouting director and general manager, has explained the reasoning behind this philosophy numerous times (which he, too, personally subscribes to). Part of it is that it's often a little bit easier for a center to make the successful transition to wing if called upon to do so than the other way around. There aren't a lot of Claude Giroux types who get drafted as winger but thrive as centers but plenty of centers who've become quality wingers ala Simon Gagne or the recent play of Brayden Schenn. Another part is that centers are used to handling bigger two-way responsibilities.
Rubtsov is projected to have solid NHL upside as an offensive player as well as being responsible and effective without the puck. His primary skills will likely lay more on the playmaking side than the finishing side but so what? A good playmaker can make an average finisher into an above-average one and an above-average one into a high-end one.
If Rubtsov eventually prevents or breaks up scoring chances for the other side, helps his NHL team spend more time attacking and less defending PLUS he helps turn 15-goal scorers into 20-22 goal scorers, 25 goal scorers into 30-32 goal scorers and scores in double digits himself, he will be a more valuable player than someone who puts more pucks in the net but doesn't bring the other elements.
Even if the Flyers drafted Bellows, he was not going to be relied upon in 2016-17 to be their immediate answer to the need for a sniping winger. I'm not sure how Hextall plans to address that need for next season, but it was never going to be with their 2016 first-round pick unless they had somehow been able to trade up to the top of the Draft.
CAN THE FLYERS GET RUBTSOV OUT OF HIS KHL CONTRACT?
It is not impossible that agent Mark Gandler could help client German Rubtsov get out of his two-year contractual commitment to KHL club Yityaz Chekov. However, that will be up to the Russian team. In theory, all KHL players have a guaranteed right to be able to break a contract.
This used to be doable under Russian law essentially by an employee putting in writing his or her intent to end employment. Some years ago, however, the loophole was partially closed for certain businesses, including professional athletics. The employer was given more more leeway to set the conditions for contractual release, generally by way of requiring financial compensation to the owners.
In practice, it's often done in such a way that it makes it economically unattractive for a player to break the contract early. There has not been an NHL-IIHF transfer agreement for quite awhile now and, while the NHL and Russian Hockey Federation have supposedly come close a few times in establishing an NHL-RHF transfer agreement, it's never been finalized. The only thing that does exist is an agreement not to permit contract-jumping (i.e., a player signed to a team in one league can not abandon an existing contract to sign in the other league).
Without a standardized system of compensation for transfers, it is up to the management of each team to set the terms of release. If Rubtsov were immediately NHL ready, it would be feasible for him to secure his release. Leaving Russia now to play for a Canadian junior team would probably be untenable
Rubtsov is eligible to play in the American Hockey League right away and the Flyers could even "slide" an entry-level contract there until he turns 20. However, Hextall has already said he does not think Rubtsov is AHL-ready much less NHL-ready. It will either by the CHL or Russia.
I should point out, however, that the "developed via AHL" scenario, while quite risky, sometimes works. Vaclav Prospal -- weighing all of about 165 pounds and not yet speaking English -- started out in the AHL at age 18 in an era when the AHL was an even rougher, more grinding-oriented league than it is now. It took him four years and a lot of growing pains but he eventually went on to a 1,000-plus game NHL career that was pretty solid. The late Pavol Demitra did something similar, although he was more physically ready to handle it.
Why chance it, though? There's no need. The Flyers would no doubt prefer to have Rubtsov in the CHL for reasons I discussed the other day. Barring that, the MHL/KHL track is fine so long as he gets the higher-level playing time and coaching he needs to develop.
************
Philadelphia Flyers Blogger •NHL.com • 
Join the Discussion:
»