Yes, Bure was injured more than I’d like. I agree with the above article that he was the most exciting hockey player I’ve ever seen. I’m usually a goalie fan, but watching Bure was an amazing experience. I’ll also agree he was one dimensional, nothing but a goal scorer. Still, in those years leading up to the 2004 lockout, Bure was a reason I’d go to a game. Even now, I look for his games on NHL network or Hulu.
If Cam Neely is in the Hall of Fame, then Bure definitely belongs. Eric Lindros as well.
I’d vote Lindros in a heartbeat as well.
These HOF things get a bit tricky because, like it or not, the off-field life enters into it.
I actually had a very casual acquaintance with Glenn Anderson. He was certainly a nice enough guy. I skated with him. Yet, he had some family issues that sullied his reputation and turned him off to a lot of people that otherwise would be his fans. Even-so, six Stanley Cups is something that can’t be ignored even if he was working with Gretzky and Messier.
Pavel Bure? The problem is that he seems to have been connected to the Russian mob. He may have been “owned” and, if so, how can that be resolved?
Lindross? Everybody wanted to hate him but he was a unique talent. He was a big, strong, pretty boy and took a lot of cheap shots because of it. Suffice it to say that he was a far more talented player than a lot of guys in the HOF.
That may be, but that’s not why people hated him. They hated him because his father was a primo douche who seemingly did everything he could to make Eric look bad. The Flyers mortgaged their future on him and he never delivered, which causes the “overrated” label to be firmly affixed to him. Had he delivered the Cup all would probably have been forgiven. Instead he skated with his head down, took a bunch of shots to the head, and then played scared for the last few years of his career, a considerable liability in a guy that big who needs to be in there banging away.
Anyway, whether or not you think Pavel Bure should be in the Hall depends entirely upon what you think the Hall should be for. I personally don’t think he should be in, he didn’t play nearly long enough. If outright skill and demonstrated ability is the criteria, he’s a lock. But it should be some combination of the two.
Well, that is the fan’s perspective, not the players perspective. I have a son who is/was a very skilled hockey player. He took a number of hits to the head which we didn’t even realized had happened. It caused brain damage. He is young enough that we are doing the work-arounds and he is responding.
The general public doesn’t get how serious this problem is. We hear about the stars like Sidney Crosby but we don’t hear about the ones that got rocked before they could ever create a name for themselves.
I don’t know what Lindros’ situation is now. I wish him well. What I don’t want is for him to end up like Dave Duerson.
It’s easy to criticize the guy that plays with his head down. It’s another thing to live with permanent brain damage. No amount of money solves that problem.
I find it extraordinarily difficult to figure out what the Hockey Hall of Fame’s criteria are. Aside from the really easy Gretzky-LeFleur-Dryden choices, it’s wildly inconsistent and players from the six-team era are amazingly overrepresented.
So if you’re going to argue Bure should be in, well, sure, why not? The argument for Bure has already been stated; if Cam Neely, why note Bure? Their qualifications are more or less identical, and let’s be honest, the only reason Neely is in and Bure is not is that Neely is a big Canadian guy and Bure’s Russian. But then, if Neely and Bure, why not Lindros? He played just as many games as those two, scored more points, was a great defensive player and like Neely and Bure led his team to a Finals but didn’t win it.
I can only conclude Cam Neely was selected, instead of Bure and Lindros, solely based on who the voters personally liked more.
But we could do these threads all day. Why isn’t Doug Gilmour in the Hall of Fame?
I’m not sure how much Bure played (if he did, in the Russian leagues) after his NHL career was over. They’ve put in people who were international stars (such as Viacheslav Fetisov, who spent all of his prime years with the Russian National team).
There have definitely been some strange inductees and omissions; Adam Oates is still on the outside looking in, despite more than 1,000 assists. Neely was great when healthy but he was constantly missing games and had to retire at age 30. Seems like the voters overrate pure goal scorers and underrate assist guys.
I’m pretty sure he will be. If Dino Ciccarelli gets in, Gilmour is a shoe-in.
I think Bure was an awesome player, but no he did not do enough during his time in the league to warrant being inducted to the HOF… but it is certainly debatable…
Same goes for Lindros, great Talent but never made it to the level he should have because of head injuries which were entirely his fault. The biggest hits I saw him take, like this one from Stevens and this one from Kasparitis happened because he, as mentioned above, didn’t skate with his head up… The problem is that Lindros spent his entire life playing against competition that he physically dominated and developed the bad habit of skating with his head down because no one could rock him… Well as shown by his NHL career that didn’t work out so well for him at that level… take into account the arrogance that he displayed upon entering the league and then not delivering I think it is fairly obvious why he is not in the HOF…
As for Neely… He was one of the most dominant players in the league during his career, being only second to Gretzky for the fastest 50 goals scored and that was done after his injury… from his wiki page…
Only Wayne Gretzky, Mario Lemieux, and Brett Hull scored a better goals per game average over the course of an NHL season than Neely did with his 50-goals-in-44-games in the 1993–94 season. Also, only ten players in NHL history scored a better goals per game average over their career than Neely. He reached the fifty goal mark three times, played in five All-Star games, and was named the league’s Second Team All-Star at right wing in 1988, 1990, 1991, and 1994.
the idea, mentioned above, that he was often injured in his career in not true before his injury in the 91’ playoffs… before that point he had played in at least 69 games every season but his rookie year and even played 42 of the 48 possible games of the lockout year after his injury…
Yes his career was cut short by injury, but it is that injury that probably cemented his election to the HOF… Neely was injured by a cheapshot and despite the severity of the injury he still fought his way back and ended up scoring 50 goals in 44 games despite having a rather debilitating condition
As for Gilmour and Oates… I think they will both be in eventually, it is just a matter of time…
If you vote in Bure wouldn’t you ahve to vote in Mogilny, too?
There’s very few baseball HoFers whose careers ended at age 30, and with good reason. You have to be of a very high caliber to even be in the conversation, and Neely while a very solid player only had 7 seasons where he played in most of his team’s games. You don’t give him credit for what-if games (else we can also put Nomar Garciaparra in the baseball Hall). If Neely, then why not Lindros’ linemate John LeClair, who also topped 50 goals 3 times?
First off Neely did have 8 seasons that he played over 80% of the games… You are probably not counting 94-95 when he played 42 of 48… not that going from 7 to 8 is a significant change, but this forum seems to be a place where people like to get their facts straight…
Also no one, not me or the HoF voters are giving Neely credit for any games he did not play…
Like Baseball, there are very few Hockey HoFers whose careers ened at age 30, Neely is the only one that I can think of… whether you are I agree with it, the voters decided that Cam Neely was an exceptional player and person and decided to honor him… why??? Again I think it all has to do with the end of his career instead of the main body of it, and the end of his career was exceptional… I don’t think the Neely detractors in this thread seem to realize that after the Samuelson cheapshot and the onset of the mytosis, Neely was never expected to play again and spent two years with scant playing time rehabilitating an injury that for most people would be career ending… Then he came back and had one of the best statistical season of any hockey player… ever… despite the fact that he was playing with excruciating pain that basically made him alternate playing games and being a scratch… Then he played 42 of 48 games with an injury that never truly healed and almost maintained a point a game average… made one more attempt the next season and still maintained an almost point a game average… even seriously injured the guy was still able to contribute to his team…
You can point out players that have statically similar careers until the cows come home… Stats are only part of the equation there are plenty of players on the Neely/Lindros/Leclair level who are on the fence as to whether or not they will get the nod for the hall… The final 5 years of Neely’s career are a testament to the strength and will of an exceptional man and player… While you might not think much of it, the HoF voters did and I happen to agree with them…
Just did some reading and wanted to add a few interesting things that are pertinent to the conversation…
First off the Wiki article for Neely is wrong (go figure) about his ranking in goals per game… Hockey reference.com has him ranked at 14th rather than 11th… Sandwiched between two guys called Maurice Richard and Marcel Dionne… of the 13 ahead of him 9 are HoFers… of the 4 that are not HoFers one is the ineligible Alexander Ovechkin… Two are Tim Kerr and Rick Martin… two players that also had great careers cut short by injury… The Fourth is Pavel Bure who ranks in at 6th all time, one spot ahead of Wayne Gretzky…
I take it the NHL Hall of Fame (and really, I’m not sure I even knew there was one… why is baseball seemingly the only “serious” hall of fame… or am I projecting my own sports preferences here) doesn’t have any requirements for eligibility other than being retired?
But that’s precisely what you do when you say:
Because he played in 9, 13, 49, 42, and 49 games in those seasons. No matter what he did when he was on the ice, he was hurting his team significantly when he was out. They may be a “testament” of a sort, as you say, but they don’t represent a lot of actual value, and to consider him anywhere close to the equal of top players who actually played most of their team games during those seasons is silly.
The baseball Hall voters did the same thing for Kirby Puckett (i.e. sympathy vote), but even he had much more of a career than Neely.
Players and officials must be retired at least three years; builders (coaches, GMs, etc.) may be either “active or inactive”
I absolutely do not… I never make any kind of statement about what his career could have been… All that I say that he belongs in the hall because of what he did during his career nothing more… part of it is his performance… part is the courage and determination… part of it because he was Seabass…
So the year he played 49 games and scored 50 goals you think he hurt his team significantly??? I do not see any way that having a 50 goal scorer on your team could hurt you… anyone who can produce nearly a point a game is an asset to your team… also the first two seasons during his initial recovery he was on the IR rather than the roster for most of the time…
So silly he is in the HoF… He was a great player who embodied some of the great qualities a hockey player can; right up to an excruciating end… I guess you are entitled not to be impressed…
Sure he got in on the nice guy vote… so will Gilmour one day I would expect… but they only elected one NHL player that year and so who could replace him??? Glen Anderson is the only person mentioned in this thread that was actually eligible in 2005, but they held him back a few years for reasons mentioned above…
I’ll concede that timing had a lot to do with his selection, but he deserved it…
A guy with a talented but short career will have a goals-per-game number that is positively skewed by him not having a different type of game/role later in his long career.
Pavel Bure is my favorite player of all time, but his goals-per-game being slightly ahead of Gretzky is because Pavel didn’t have a 5-6 year tail off (or longer) at the end of a long career that saw him become a mentor, leader, transition player and a guy filling roles and focusing on assists.