Future NHL hall of Famers

[neilnijjar]

I can agree with you, there is a difference. I do think there is a crossover, though, at a certain point where longevity = elite skill. A guy who grinds around the league for 10-12, maybe even 15 seasons may not be elite. I think that's where Cullen's case becomes interesting. He played 71 games and averaged over 11 minutes of ice time as a 42 year old in his final season. If you are choosing a 42 year old over a 20 year old in the NHL, there's got to be a reason why. The NHL and NHL roster slots are too competitive to throw $650k and ice time at a guy as a favor.

I see your point, and Ill use it for my guy's case in Patrick Marleau

Hes over 1700 games and approaching the NHL record for that - He has longevity, but to solidify his case he has 500 goals and 1000 points - high level production with longevity. If we are adding longevity as a marker for HHOF - he is a no brainier first ballot (I personally think he wont be first ballot)

Cullen on the other hand - as impressive as his longevity is - I just dont see other individual accomplishments (he does have 3 cups) that warrant a HHOF

266 goals and 731 points - to me that is a very good player with 1500 games. Above average for sure - but not in the HOF discussion

 

[Kharlamov17]

Boris Mikhailov will be inducted in the coming three years unless he dies before that.

EDIT: And a Nay on both Sedin's. Would there even be a discussion if they played for a US team?

EDIT 2: Get those 500 Goal Scorers in.

 

[30ranfordfan]

I see your point, and Ill use it for my guy's case in Patrick Marleau

Hes over 1700 games and approaching the NHL record for that - He has longevity, but to solidify his case he has 500 goals and 1000 points - high level production with longevity. If we are adding longevity as a marker for HHOF - he is a no brainier first ballot (I personally think he wont be first ballot)

Cullen on the other hand - as impressive as his longevity is - I just dont see other individual accomplishments (he does have 3 cups) that warrant a HHOF

266 goals and 731 points - to me that is a very good player with 1500 games. Above average for sure - but not in the HOF discussion

I'm also in the camp of "of course Matt Cullen is not a HOFer", but I enjoy these discussions....

Marleau will probably never be described as elite. Was he ever a top 10 player in the NHL? He's been very good his whole career, certainly "all star" caliber for many years, but probably not a superstar.

His career totals are impressive, including his number of games. It's probably going to be enough to get him into the HOF (I think). While he's probably a notch below being a true "all time great" - he compares well against plenty of other HOFers.

Matt Cullen. And to be honest, I never thought I'd be part of a "should Matt Cullen be in the HOF?" conversation.... but here we go

I think Fred Bear makes an interesting point. He was able to stick in the league until the age of 42 - and he was not insignificant even at 42. Double digit minutes. Why? A sound defensive game. I never paid much attention to him - so while I'm not prepared to call him an "elite" defensive player - I'm also not prepared to argue against it.

Guy Carbonneau is in the HOF. He played 1318 games, with 260 goals & 403 assists. Matt Cullen Had more games (1516), Goals (266), and assists (465). Of course Guy is not in the HOF because of his offensive talent - he's there because of how good he was defensively (while not sucking on offense).

Both of them won three Stanley Cups. The only real big difference in their careers was Selke trophies that Carbonneau won.

Now, maybe three Selke's is enough of a difference....... but I think a lot of HOF arguments come down to precedence. I am certainly not prepared to say that Guy Carbonneau was a signficantly better player than Matt Cullen. Does that make Cullen a HOFer? I'm not sure that I'll ever get to the point of saying that..... but I see where the argument comes from.

But got back to a comment a made earlier. Should Charlie Huddy be in the HOF? I think most of us would say "of course not" - but Kevin Lowe just got in.

What's the difference between the two? Lowe won a 6th Cup (with the Rangers). Lowe played about 200 more games. Huddy has more more goals & assists (both in the regular season and the playoffs). Huddy won the Plus / Minus award in 82-83, Lowe won the King Clancy in 1990. Lowe played for Team Canada twice, Huddy only once. The big difference would be All Star games - Lowe played in 7, Huddy in none...... but in any one of those seasons, I'm not sure why Lowe would have been considered so much better than Huddy.

 

[hockeyguy2006]

Marleau is not a hall of famer. He was never elite and was never the best player on his team aside from arguably 1-2 seasons. If the HHOF was like movie awards, he'd win best supporting actor.

 

[japhi]

Boris Mikhailov will be inducted in the coming three years unless he dies before that.

EDIT: And a Nay on both Sedin's. Would there even be a discussion if they played for a US team?

EDIT 2: Get those 500 Goal Scorers in.

D Sedin gets in for sure. 1100 points in the dead puck era in only 1300 games. If he played in the 80s he puts up 1400 points. Not first ballot but he will get in.

 

[CKcardtrader]

Marleau is not a hall of famer. He was never elite and was never the best player on his team aside from arguably 1-2 seasons. If the HHOF was like movie awards, he'd win best supporting actor.

For comparison the HHOF is like an actor hall of fame. It would celebrate the profession of acting and would include the careers of Lead performers as well as supporting characters. Some supporting actors are better actors than leads. Same as Hockey. For a hall to not consider specialists is short sighted and boring on their part. I contend they don't celebrate the role and careers of stay at home defensemen, special teams role players and tough guys as they should. Scoring goals is only a small component of the game.