I don't disagree, but it seems like goalie careers are getting shorter. There have been a lot of net minders who are considered 'excellent' for a short period of time and then fall apart. Compiling isn't sexy but there is something to be said for longevity. Not saying the HHOF is it, but there is something underrated about consistency.

I feel like people would generally in favor of Henrik Lundqvist and you looking at pretty comparable save percentages and GAA.
- Queenie_5_hole

I hear what you’re saying, and I don’t think longevity should be entirely discounted, but at a bare minimum I would like you to be an elite player at your position for at least 3-5 seasons. Miller falls well short of that mark.

The best quick comparable I can think of for Miller would be, like, Mike Liut. Was named best goalie in the league one time (1980), but otherwise was basically just good to very good for a long time.

Or imagine if, like, one year Sean Burke was possessed by Patrick Roy, won the Vezina, and then immediately went back to being Sean Burke. That’s basically Miller’s career.

I also think the gap between Miller and Lundqvist is much wider than you give it credit for. Career save percentage of .914 vs .918 doesn’t seem like much out of context, but compared to league average Hank is saving roughly twice as many goals above expected, purely according to the raw unadjusted stats. More sophisticated models that use shot quality data also consistently put Lundqvist at the top of the list of post-lockout goaltenders, even after adjusting for the (massive) home scorer bias at MSG.

Swiss cheese Miller, NO.

Even though the majority opinion seems strongly on the “no way” side, it really feels like somebody should directly and specifically shoot down Ek's rationale for wanting to induct him.

I nominate myself. Let’s dig into those four determining factors he uses.

- Career Stats

I would agree that career stats are crucial. However, I solidly reject that wins are a meaningful stat for evaluating goaltenders. It is a team stat through and through. According to more relevant metrics (adjusted save percentage, goals allowed versus expected, etc.) Miller's career individual stats grade out as good but thoroughly unremarkable.

- Was he ever BEST in the NHL?

Again, I would agree that an elite peak is an important (even mandatory) credential, and Miller did win a Vezina. That was literally his only elite season, according to both Vezina voters and the statistics. That’s just not enough, especially with how relatively common it is for journeyman goaltenders to fluke themselves into one or two incredible seasons. Should Jim Carey be in the Hall of Fame? Pete Peeters? Jose Theodore?

- This is the HOCKEY Hall of Fame. Not only the NHL

Once again, I agree in principle but not in practice. I do think it’s important to consider a player’s career outside the NHL when evaluating their Hall credentials. If a HHOF candidate played pro extensively in Europe or Russia (Hasek, Jagr, Larionov, many Soviet-era players, etc.) or had especially notable international careers, those seasons or tournaments are definitely relevant to their candidacy (with reasonable adjustments made for level of competition).

Miller, however, did not play pro outside of North America, and he played a grand total of just 15 games for the US National Team—8 of them for early 00s World Championship squads compromised mostly of minor league players. He was the starter for one Olympics. He played well, sure, but if you’re talking about credentials for the Hockey Hall of Fame his international resume is extremely limited. Six games for a silver medal winner is not a “strong international career.”

- Did he win the Cup/Gold Medal?

Again, this is a team award, not a goalie award, just like win totals.

Even though the majority opinion seems strongly on the “no way” side, it really feels like somebody should directly and specifically shoot down Ek's rationale for wanting to induct him.

I nominate myself. Let’s dig into those four determining factors he uses.

- Career Stats

I would agree that career stats are crucial. However, I solidly reject that wins are a meaningful stat for evaluating goaltenders. It is a team stat through and through. According to more relevant metrics (adjusted save percentage, goals allowed versus expected, etc.) Miller's career individual stats grade out as good but thoroughly unremarkable.

- Was he ever BEST in the NHL?

Again, I would agree that an elite peak is an important (even mandatory) credential, and Miller did win a Vezina. That was literally his only elite season, according to both Vezina voters and the statistics. That’s just not enough, especially with how relatively common it is for journeyman goaltenders to fluke themselves into one or two incredible seasons. Should Jim Carey be in the Hall of Fame? Pete Peeters? Jose Theodore?

- This is the HOCKEY Hall of Fame. Not only the NHL

Once again, I agree in principle but not in practice. I do think it’s important to consider a player’s career outside the NHL when evaluating their Hall credentials. If a HHOF candidate played pro extensively in Europe or Russia (Hasek, Jagr, Larionov, many Soviet-era players, etc.) or had especially notable international careers, those seasons or tournaments are definitely relevant to their candidacy (with reasonable adjustments made for level of competition).

Miller, however, did not play pro outside of North America, and he played a grand total of just 15 games for the US National Team—8 of them for early 00s World Championship squads compromised mostly of minor league players. He was the starter for one Olympics. He played well, sure, but if you’re talking about credentials for the Hockey Hall of Fame his international resume is extremely limited. Six games for a silver medal winner is not a “strong international career.”

- Did he win the Cup/Gold Medal?

Again, this is a team award, not a goalie award, just like win totals.
- Sven22

Cup/Gold Medals are team awards but still contribute to a player's HOF eligibility. Kind of like a tie breaker, in my mind.

In this case it doesn't matter because the answer is no all the way around.

He might get in eventually if no American goalie passes his win record. He also has a Vezina and an Olympic silver to his resume, but outside of that, I don't see it happening if we're already expecting Fleury, Loungo, and Lundqvist to be in the HoF one day.
- KGBflyers10

Quick could have 2 good season to krack(en) Miller's win total 390 but if he stays with the Kings and Petersen takes over the next season or two Miller might be the highest US goalie in wins and even then you'd probably see Quick get in before Miller because of his 2 cups and higher ceiling when he was good.

Not

nope.I don't see him being up there with guys like Hasek, Fuhr, Roy, Broduer and Vachon. The only other guy elected in this century was Belfour and I have reservations about him being there. You'll probably see Luongo there next year but he's above Miller on my list too.
- eagleputter

What could you possibly have against the all time greatest drunk in NHL history?

Eklund: Ryan Miller: Hall of Fame or Not?
- Eklund

If you have to ask then the answer is no

This guy has done nothing in his career

Cup/Gold Medals are team awards but still contribute to a player's HOF eligibility. Kind of like a tie breaker, in my mind.

In this case it doesn't matter because the answer is no all the way around.
- BINGO!

Yes, but to me the HOF means the best of the best, and performing on the big stage(SC Finals) is a bit different than performing just during the regular season. In my opinion you need to perform not only during regular season, but on the biggest stage of them all to get in, unless you’re a generational talent, and those players normally win cups anyway.

If he gets in before Chris Osgood, then we have proof the process is flawed.

Ryan Miller could never win the big game. Nope.

No.

US Hockey Hall of Fame, yes.

Not a chance

no

If he gets in before Chris Osgood, then we have proof the process is flawed.
- Redman37

Neither should get in, Osgood is nothing close to a Hall of Famer. Miller shouldnt be in it either, however if we are comparing the two, Miller gets the nod over Osgood.

I hear what you’re saying, and I don’t think longevity should be entirely discounted, but at a bare minimum I would like you to be an elite player at your position for at least 3-5 seasons. Miller falls well short of that mark.

The best quick comparable I can think of for Miller would be, like, Mike Liut. Was named best goalie in the league one time (1980), but otherwise was basically just good to very good for a long time.

Or imagine if, like, one year Sean Burke was possessed by Patrick Roy, won the Vezina, and then immediately went back to being Sean Burke. That’s basically Miller’s career.

I also think the gap between Miller and Lundqvist is much wider than you give it credit for. Career save percentage of .914 vs .918 doesn’t seem like much out of context, but compared to league average Hank is saving roughly twice as many goals above expected, purely according to the raw unadjusted stats. More sophisticated models that use shot quality data also consistently put Lundqvist at the top of the list of post-lockout goaltenders, even after adjusting for the (massive) home scorer bias at MSG.
- Sven22

To be honest, as much as I have derided Hank for being overrated, I don't think Miller is really close to him either. Just thought it was a decent example for my question. But I appreciate the response.

If he gets in before Chris Osgood, then we have proof the process is flawed.
- Redman37

Neither are worthy. End of story.

Not that Miller deserves it, but going forward with the way goalies are developed, there will be one HOFer every decade at this rate. Nobody is going to hit the wins. Nobody will last long enough in the NHL if they start at 23+ like almost ever goalie. Dynasties don't exist, the closest we have are just very competitive teams. If goalies last too long their sv% will tank them like father time.

They're (frank)ed.

Eklund: Ryan Miller: Hall of Fame or Not?
- Eklund

No.

Not that Miller deserves it, but going forward with the way goalies are developed, there will be one HOFer every decade at this rate. Nobody is going to hit the wins. Nobody will last long enough in the NHL if they start at 23+ like almost ever goalie. Dynasties don't exist, the closest we have are just very competitive teams. If goalies last too long their sv% will tank them like father time.

They're (frank)ed.
- AdamFrench

good. dumb female doges get what the deserve

Eklund: Ryan Miller: Hall of Fame or Not?
- Eklund

nope

I loved "Miller-time" at its height, he was fun to watch. But that being said, unfortunately not at this point. Not enough accolades.

No

Joining the bandwagon and saying a probable no to HHOF for Miller. By all accounts a great guy and locker room presence, but beyond being the winningest US goalie of all time (which possibly only happened because he got traded from Buffalo when he did) he doesn't have those consistent numbers or hardware that a Luongo or Lundqvist has had.

To that effect, is Miller better than some of the names already in the HHOF? For sure. Sometimes it doesn't seem like there's much rhyme or reason to selections. Perhaps in time.