Adam Kirshenblatt: 2015 Hockey Hall of Fame Class

Angela Ruggiero -- nice. Michigan lady!

Hard to argue with those 4. Still want to see Cujo get in there.

Adam Kirshenblatt: 2015 Hockey Hall of Fame Class
- MasWE

good list with exception of Andreychuk getting screwed again

http://www.quanthockey.co...r-play-goals-leaders.html


nhl rank
pp goals 1st
goals 14th
points 28th
gwg 31st
games played 6th

good list with exception of Andreychuk getting screwed again

http://www.quanthockey.co...r-play-goals-leaders.html


nhl rank
pp goals 1st
goals 14th
points 28th
gwg 31st
games played 6th
- homiedclown

He will get in there... it's the 'only 4 per year rule' keeping him out. Gotta be a weak class at some point. These last few have been pretty stacked.

Whalers fan will never forgive Karmanos, but he's been a tremendously influential individual for decades in hockey.

good list with exception of Andreychuk getting screwed again

http://www.quanthockey.co...r-play-goals-leaders.html


nhl rank
pp goals 1st
goals 14th
points 28th
gwg 31st
games played 6th
- homiedclown

how? who was he going to beat out exactly? Housley?

how? who was he going to beat out exactly? Housley?
- Jurco_28

Pronger should have waited until he was actually retired.

how? who was he going to beat out exactly? Housley?
- Jurco_28

pronger is still getting paid, start there

you can make a case to put him in before Fedorov and Housley

pronger is still getting paid, start there

you can make a case to put him in before Fedorov and Housley
- homiedclown

him before Fedorov? please, let me see a case for that one

please

good list with exception of Andreychuk getting screwed again

http://www.quanthockey.co...r-play-goals-leaders.html


nhl rank
pp goals 1st
goals 14th
points 28th
gwg 31st
games played 6th
- homiedclown

Andreychuk never won a major award, or even came close. He was never a first-team or second-team all star, despite playing the historically weakest position in hockey (LW). He never got so much as a single, stray fifth-place vote for the Hart Trophy from any voter in any season of his career.

Despite being an elite PP goal scorer (he is famously the all-time leader in that category), it was washed out being being merely good at even strength. Only twice did he finish top-10 in a season in goals, and never higher than fourth. Only once did he finish top-10 in points (9th place in 1994).

When you adjust for scoring levels during the eras he played in, he really only had 3 all-star caliber seasons in terms of offensive production -- 1992, 1993, and 1994. Using the era-adjusted points system of Hockey-Reference, in those seasons Andreychuck scored the equivalent of 80, 80, and 90 points once adjusted for league scoring rates. In no other season in his career did Andreychuk manage even the equivalent of a 70-point season when adjusted for era.

Dave Andreychuk was a good first-liner for a long time in a high-scoring era. At his peak he was a low-level all-star for a few years. He was still a productive NHLer at 42, which is damned impressive, but after turning 34 he never again cracked even 40 points in a season.

Great player. Durable as all hell. Wicked PP specialist. Not a hall of famer.

Andreychuk never won a major award, or even came close. He was never a first-team or second-team all star, despite playing the historically weakest position in hockey (LW). He never got so much as a single, stray fifth-place vote for the Hart Trophy from any voter in any season of his career.

Despite being an elite PP goal scorer (he is famously the all-time leader in that category), it was washed out being being merely good at even strength. Only twice did he finish top-10 in a season in goals, and never higher than fourth. Only once did he finish top-10 in points (9th place in 1994).

When you adjust for scoring levels during the eras he played in, he really only had 3 all-star caliber seasons in terms of offensive production -- 1992, 1993, and 1994. Using the era-adjusted points system of Hockey-Reference, in those seasons Andreychuck scored the equivalent of 80, 80, and 90 points once adjusted for league scoring rates. In no other season in his career did Andreychuk manage even the equivalent of a 70-point season when adjusted for era.

Dave Andreychuk was a good first-liner for a long time in a high-scoring era. At his peak he was a low-level all-star for a few years. He was still a productive NHLer at 42, which is damned impressive, but after turning 34 he never again cracked even 40 points in a season.

Great player. Durable as all hell. Wicked PP specialist. Not a hall of famer.
- Sven22

500 goals is the bench mark to get in the HOF

he has 640

him before Fedorov? please, let me see a case for that one

please
- Jurco_28

157 more goals

good list with exception of Andreychuk getting screwed again

http://www.quanthockey.co...r-play-goals-leaders.html


nhl rank
pp goals 1st
goals 14th
points 28th
gwg 31st
games played 6th
- homiedclown

I think one of the craziest things on that list is Lemieux being 7th in PP goals, only 38 below Andreychuk, and playing 350+ less games than everybody above him.

I think one of the craziest things on that list is Lemieux being 7th in PP goals, only 38 below Andreychuk, and playing 350+ less games than everybody above him.
- cap1681

we were chatting about jagr today, after pulling stats up on andreychuk in the sabres blog


jagr is starting to make a case to round out the top 5 of all time


the purist says keep howe on the list but.................

I have bossy number five over howe on my list and could easily put espo over howe as well

we were chatting about jagr today, after pulling stats up on andreychuk in the sabres blog


jagr is starting to make a case to round out the top 5 of all time


the purist says keep howe on the list but.................

I have bossy number five over howe on my list and could easily put espo over howe as well
- homiedclown

He is easily the greatest "European" player of all time. Think of what his stats would look like if he didn't go play in the KHL for 3 years.

500 goals is the bench mark to get in the HOF

he has 640
- homiedclown

I understand and respect that opinion, but I personally tend to weigh peak performance much more strongly than longevity or arbitrary career total benchmarks. Mike Gartner scored 708 goals but I'm not convinced he belongs in the HOF either.

I guess I just don't think being a solid first-liner for a long time should be good enough on its own to get you into the Hall of Fame. Ideally, I want my Hall of Famers to be able to say, for a period of at least 4-5 years, they were one of the very best players on the planet, or else they were all-star quality for 10-15 years a la Sundin or Shanahan. Andreychuk was never in that category. He really only had 3 all-star seasons. He was just a good first liner for a really long time.

I try to ask myself this though experiment: if, say, Val Filppula drank a magic elixir of youth that allowed him to score between 50 and 60 points every season for 40 years, by the time he retired he'd be No. 2 on the all-time scoring list. But would that make him a Hall of Famer?

I say no. And that's sort of why I'd say no to Andreychuk as well. I don't think he was ever really an elite player, or even elite goal scorer overall. He was a good first liner in a high-scoring era, and then he hung for 10 more years as a second-liner, padding his career totals.

To be fair I don't think he's that far off from the standard, but if he does get in he'd be one of the weaker entries for sure.

I understand and respect that opinion, but I personally tend to weigh peak performance much more strongly than longevity or arbitrary career total benchmarks. Mike Gartner scored 708 goals but I'm not convinced he belongs in the HOF either.

I guess I just don't think being a solid first-liner for a long time should be good enough on its own to get you into the Hall of Fame. Ideally, I want my Hall of Famers to be able to say, for a period of at least 4-5 years, they were one of the very best players on the planet, or else they were all-star quality for 10-15 years a la Sundin or Shanahan. Andreychuk was never in that category. He really only had 3 all-star seasons. He was just a good first liner for a really long time.

I try to ask myself this though experiment: if, say, Val Filppula drank a magic elixir of youth that allowed him to score between 50 and 60 points every season for 40 years, by the time he retired he'd be No. 2 on the all-time scoring list. But would that make him a Hall of Famer?

I say no. And that's sort of why I'd say no to Andreychuk as well. I don't think he was ever really an elite player, or even elite goal scorer overall. He was a good first liner in a high-scoring era, and then he hung for 10 more years as a second-liner, padding his career totals.

To be fair I don't think he's that far off from the standard, but if he does get in he'd be one of the weaker entries for sure.
- Sven22

Can we pause for a minute and bask in the glory that is the Great One? Flip playing 40 seasons would be 2nd all time. Gretzky was so good.

him before Fedorov? please, let me see a case for that one

please
- Jurco_28

Detroit radio (105.1) Dery was saying that Fedorov needs to be in if they're going to let scrubs like Sundin, Gilmour, Forsberg and Nieuwendyk in.

Why are Detroiters so up Fedorov's red hole?

I understand and respect that opinion, but I personally tend to weigh peak performance much more strongly than longevity or arbitrary career total benchmarks. Mike Gartner scored 708 goals but I'm not convinced he belongs in the HOF either.

I guess I just don't think being a solid first-liner for a long time should be good enough on its own to get you into the Hall of Fame. Ideally, I want my Hall of Famers to be able to say, for a period of at least 4-5 years, they were one of the very best players on the planet, or else they were all-star quality for 10-15 years a la Sundin or Shanahan. Andreychuk was never in that category. He really only had 3 all-star seasons. He was just a good first liner for a really long time.

I try to ask myself this though experiment: if, say, Val Filppula drank a magic elixir of youth that allowed him to score between 50 and 60 points every season for 40 years, by the time he retired he'd be No. 2 on the all-time scoring list. But would that make him a Hall of Famer?

I say no. And that's sort of why I'd say no to Andreychuk as well. I don't think he was ever really an elite player, or even elite goal scorer overall. He was a good first liner in a high-scoring era, and then he hung for 10 more years as a second-liner, padding his career totals.

To be fair I don't think he's that far off from the standard, but if he does get in he'd be one of the weaker entries for sure.
- Sven22

if Andreychuck played half his career in Detroit, you would see things differently

H7

Detroit radio (105.1) Dery was saying that Fedorov needs to be in if they're going to let scrubs like Sundin, Gilmour, Forsberg and Nieuwendyk in.

Why are Detroiters so up Fedorov's red hole?
- SolidGoldBricks

To be fair, I would take Fedorov over Gilmour and Nieuwendyk on that list. Probably not over Sundin, though, and definitely not over a healthy Foppa.

Michigan sports radio guys are horrible. I assume it's the same almost everywhere, though I confess I don't pay attention.

if Andreychuck played half his career in Detroit, you would see things differently

H7
- homiedclown

Maybe. Even probably.

But then I'm one of the only hockey fans I know outside Toronto that actually thought Sundin was more worthy than Shanahan when the latter was "snubbed" in his first year of eligibility. And I almost talked myself into supporting Recchi over Fedorov this year.

I wouldn't say I'm free of bias (no one is) but I try my best to be fair and ground my thoughts in the data as much as I can.

Maybe. Even probably.

But then I'm one of the only hockey fans I know outside Toronto that actually thought Sundin was more worthy than Shanahan when the latter was "snubbed" in his first year of eligibility. And I almost talked myself into supporting Recchi over Fedorov this year.

I wouldn't say I'm free of bias (no one is) but I try my best to be fair and ground my thoughts in the data as much as I can.
- Sven22

I first thought he got snubbed when mark howe got in over him, let alone gilmour

blake, 50/50

when pronger is still getting paid, and got pushed to the front of the line, I get a little irritated

Should I just give up now with the Lindros argument? Year after year goes by....getting tired of pleading his case with scrub after scrub getting in. I cannot stand the guy but on the ice he was dominant for a long time. Doug franking gilmour is in for franks sake!

Should I just give up now with the Lindros argument? Year after year goes by....getting tired of pleading his case with scrub after scrub getting in. I cannot stand the guy but on the ice he was dominant for a long time. Doug franking gilmour is in for franks sake!
- grubshph

I support Lindros for the Hall of Fame as well.

You can make a pretty strong case that for a six-year-period (1993-94 through 1998-99) Eric Lindros was, at worst, the third-best forward in the NHL, behind Lemieux and maybe Jagr. His points-per-game ranks those seasons were 3, 1, 3, 2, 6, 4.

The injuries really do hurt his case significantly, but he was so dominant when he was healthy, for a long enough period of time, that I think it's hard to keep him out.

I support Lindros for the Hall of Fame as well.

You can make a pretty strong case that for a six-year-period (1993-94 through 1998-99) Eric Lindros was, at worst, the third-best forward in the NHL, behind Lemieux and maybe Jagr. His points-per-game ranks those seasons were 3, 1, 3, 2, 6, 4.

The injuries really do hurt his case significantly, but he was so dominant when he was healthy, for a long enough period of time, that I think it's hard to keep him out.
- Sven22

He was a Richard. And that's what's keeping him out. Neely and him had comparible numbers and Lindros was the better player. He doesn't get hurt and he's top 10 all time and the best power forward ever.