Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: NHL bias

Expand Messages
  • Martin
    ... I m a big Sharks fan since their inaugural season but winning the cup thi year! Give me a break. I agree with you that the Sharks have a much better team
    Message 1 of 62 , Sep 30, 1999
    • 0 Attachment
      At 12:30 99-10-01 -0700, you wrote:
      >From: Jon Chin <JChin@...>

      > ANd you guys smile and laugh all you want about our chances at the cup.
      >We have the best mix of young talent and veterans in the league. OUr guys
      >came to camp sharp, and it great shape. Yeah Yeah, you say, but take a look
      >sometime and see if i AM WRONG.

      I'm a big Sharks fan since their inaugural season but winning the cup thi
      year! Give me a break. I agree with you that the Sharks have a much
      better team than last year with Damphousse and Sundstrom and the record of
      the team in pre-season is excelent but remember the Sharks never had a
      season with an avg above .500 yet soooo... But I hope the'll do win the
      cup to close the big mouth of my friend who's cheering for the Ducks hehe!

      Martin


      http://goaliesarchive.homepage.com
    • William Underwood
      What I really meant was a Minor Pro Hall of Fame within the HHOF which would select enshrinees just like the main Hall.
      Message 62 of 62 , Oct 5, 1999
      • 0 Attachment
        What I really meant was a Minor Pro Hall of Fame within the HHOF which would select enshrinees
        just like the main Hall.

        S P wrote:

        > From: "S P" <wydpkp@...>
        >
        > . The Hockey Hall of Fame represents all of hockey from past to present. It
        > dedicates space to each professional hockey league(IHL,AHL,ECHL,WPHL,CHL
        > ETC..) It also has space for Junior hockey, NCAA and CIAU, as well as womans
        > University hockey and womans hockey. We could debate for years about whether
        > or not Women should be in the HHOF but we won't get anywhere. Ultimately it
        > is not our decsion. We could have a poll who thinks women should be allowed
        > in HHOF, I do believe however in the future, say 20 years from now women
        > will eventually be in the Hall, (maybe even Tardif). I think the real
        > question is do we support the Hockey Hall of Fame? The Hockey Hall of Fame
        > really only represents the NHL as far as NHLers(honoured members) go but
        > they do accept any HOCKEY PARAPHERNALIA. If anyone has anything they donate
        > it. The Hockey Hall of Fame is not for profit organization. I'm not sure of
        > the mission statement but maybe I will investigate it some more.
        >
        > www.hhof.com
        > IF anyone has anything to donate
        > Phil Pritchard
        > 416-360-4622
        >
        > sp
        >
        > rwood <wausport@...>
        > >Reply-To: hockhist@onelist.com
        > >To: hockhist@onelist.com
        > >Subject: Re: [hockhist] NHL bias
        > >Date: Tue, 05 Oct 1999 13:30:17 -0400
        > >
        > >From: William Underwood <wausport@...>
        > >
        > >It's a valid point that you make here! But in men's hockey, the NHL is the
        > >standard or else minor
        > >pro stats would have to be looked at too, like Joe Hardy being the first
        > >200 point scorer in pro
        > >hockey-- in the old NAHL, or the exploits of his Beuce team mates of that
        > >era. And I think that a
        > >minor pro and amateur section is in order! As for Europe, one has to lok at
        > >the era. Today, the
        > >top Europeans play in the NHL, in an ealrlier era, they didn't and the
        > >Soviets and Czechs
        > >couldn't! A Berlin Wall keeping a guy out of the NHL has nothing to do with
        > >his abilities!
        > >However, I do conceed, like I say, a small select core of WHA players who
        > >are UNIVERSALLY looked
        > >onto as would be NHL stars who showed some signs in the NHL like a Tardif ,
        > >or pioneers like
        > >Hedberg. Nilsson and Sjoberg certainly warrant a look!
        > >
        > >craig wrote:
        > >
        > > > From: craig <rfk@...>
        > > >
        > > > Bill,
        > > >
        > > > You raise many good points. A good example of this anti WHA bias
        > > > is very evident here in Toronto. Harold Ballard would never admit
        > > > that it was his own stupidity, greed, and cruelty towards his players
        > > > that led to the destruction of a good young Maple Leaf team in 1972,
        > > > when 5 starters jumped to the WHA. He always blamed the WHA.
        > > >
        > > > Regarding the HHOF however, what is the criteria for admittance?
        > > > We have already all agreed that there seems to be a bias towards
        > > > WHA stars and that is why a player like Marc Tardif is not in there.
        > > > However, what about a player like Hayley Wickenheiser? Is she eligable
        > > > for admittance if she continues her fine play in women's hockey?
        > > > Is the HHOF for great players everywhere, and therefore should admit
        > > > Tardif, perhaps Wickenheiser, (in the future) etc or is it for great
        > > > NHL stars? If it is the latter then I'll shut up. If it is the former,
        > > > then they have to look at the WHA, Europe and women's hockey.
        > > >
        > > > Craig
        > > >
        > > > At Tuesday, 05 October 1999, you wrote:
        > > >
        > > > >From: William Underwood <wausport@...>
        > > > >
        > > > >You do have a point about the WHA! And my position about it is
        > > > that there
        > > > >is are really two
        > > > >biases, one justifiable, one non justifiable. the justifiable one
        > > > is about
        > > > >guys like Lacroix, who
        > > > >had been highly mediocre NHLers who went on to star in a league
        > > > that was
        > > > >good, but not quite as
        > > > >good as the NHL. these guys fall into a similer category as guy
        > > > Fielder,
        > > > >a great WHL player in
        > > > >the 60's, he was a great player but NOT in the top league where
        > > > he never
        > > > >did quite crack it! The
        > > > >other bias is the one that I'd agree about totally-- the "that SOB
        > > > went
        > > > >over to the WHA so we'll
        > > > >see about any honors for him..." But one does have to be careful about
        > > > >this bias too! Remember,
        > > > >Tardif STILL never had a GREAT NHL season. We know he could have,
        > > > league
        > > > >execs at the time did
        > > > >too! This is where faded memeories and lack of exposure and even film
        > > > >of the old WHA comes into
        > > > >play! Henmce even a part of this has a reasonable expalination. What
        > > > >doesn't however, is the
        > > > >lack of acknowledgement by NHL types of what contributions that
        > > > the WHA
        > > > >made to hockey! They are
        > > > >blinded by one argument "those @#$%^&*('s raised ourn salaries,
        > > > screwed
        > > > >up our expansion plans,
        > > > >my team winning years and cost us money-- there were NO positives"
        > > > mentality.
        > > > >This is myopic on a
        > > > >good day! they seem to think that hockey lives in a vacumn and if
        > > > there
        > > > >wasn't a WHA, players
        > > > >would have never sought more money! That is a crock! We have out
        > > > of control
        > > > >escalation today, and
        > > > >there hasn't been a second league for 20 years, they are self
        > >destructing
        > > >
        > > > >now, but isn't it
        > > > >easier to blame a dead league for your woes than the guy in the
        > > > mirror?
        > > > >They forget that the WHA
        > > > >took European players from the exception to the rule to a major role!
        > > > >Sure, the NHL brought over
        > > > >Salming and Hammarstrom, but it was the Jets that prooved that a team
        > > > >with multiple Europeans CAN
        > > > >win! They also brought in more US college players than the NHL ever
        > > > did,
        > > > >helping to proove that
        > > > >more of them can play than the NHL thought! It brought an overtime
        > > > rule
        > > > >back. It pioneered teams
        > > > >holding camp in Europe. Surely these are all red letter achievements
        > > > that
        > > > >should be enough to
        > > > >land a bit more recognition! But there are some NHL types that
        > > > sort of
        > > > >like you to believe that
        > > > >they did all of this in the 80's, not prompted by the WHA! Hence,
        > > > there
        > > > >is some anti WHA bias,
        > > > >yes, but not in every case. The WHA also has it's share of Guy Fielders
        > > > too!
        > > > >
        > > > >MoreyH@... wrote:
        > > > >
        > > > >> From: MoreyH@...
        > > > >>
        > > > >> Scott,
        > > > >>
        > > > >> You wrote:
        > > > >> I always liked Mike Rogers: in 5 WHA seasons he was a steady
        > >performer,
        > > >
        > > > >> winning Rookie of the Year, but never scoring above 85 points.
        > > > Then in
        > > > >> the NHL he scores 100+ each of his first three seasons, playing
        > > > for a weak
        > > > >> Hartford team. Was he the only ex-WHA player to find the NHL
        > > > defences
        > > > >> that much weaker??
        > > > >>
        > > > >> You forgot Rogers' linemate, Blaine Stoughton. Stoughton's WHA
        > > > totals: 76-77
        > > > >> 52 (CIN), 77-78 19 (CIN-IND), 78-79 18 (IND-NE).
        > > > >> Stoughton's NHL totals after merger: 56 (79-80 HART), 43 (80-81
        > > > HART), 52
        > > > >> (81-82 HART) and 45 (82-83 HART). Holding out in 83 ruined his
        > > > career.
        > > > >>
        > > > >> Another forgotten soul who found the NHL defenses easier was Kent
        > > > Nilsson.
        > > > >> The Magic Man scored 42 in 77-78 with WPG and 39 in 78-79. Atlanta
        > > > reclaimed
        > > > >> him and he went on to score 264 goals over the next eight season,
        > > > including
        > > > >> 49 in 80-81 for Calgary.
        > > > >>
        > > > >> And although he was just 17 when he started in the WHA. it is
        > > > worth noting
        > > > >> that Wayne Gretzky did not have as bad of a year as he did in
        > > > the WHA in
        > > > >> 78-79 until he was 31 in 92-93. And all he did that year was
        > > > lead the Kings
        > > > >> to the Cup finals.
        > > > >>
        > > > >> And Bill, you wrote:
        > > > >> "Tardif was an example of a WHA star who would have also been
        > > > an excellent
        > > > >> NHL player. I can't say
        > > > >> that about every WHA gun any more than I could about every single
        > > > Soviet
        > > > >> National Team player ,
        > > > >> but he was a guy that I would! Still, he will probably never see
        > > > the Hall
        > > > >> because as time goes on
        > > > >> wounds slowly heal over the WHA years as the old generation retires,
        > > > but
        > > > >> unfortunatley memories
        > > > >> fade even faster!"
        > > > >>
        > > > >> Thank you for proving my point that there is bias on behalf of
        > > > the NHL
        > > > >> regarding the Hall of Fame and ex-WHA players.
        > > > >>
        > > > >> Good thing Gordie had those 25 years in Detroit, eh?
        > > > >>
        > > > >> Morey
        > > > >>
        > > > >> > This has been a Hockey History List mailing
        > > > >> <A HREF=http://www.enol.com/~liebmann/hockey/hockhist.htm>Our
        > > > Homepage</A>
        > > > >> The Hockey History List is the official mailing list of the Hockey
        > > > Research
        > > > >Association (HRA)
        > > > >
        > > > >--------------------------- ONElist Sponsor --------------------
        > > > --------
        > > > >
        > > > >Choose from a wide selection of high-quality newsletters at ONElist.
        > > > >For details on ONElist's PROS&PUNDITS newsletters, click below.
        > > > ><a href=" http://clickme.onelist.com/ad/prospun2 ">Click Here</a>
        > > > >
        > > > >----------------------------------------------------------------
        > > > --------
        > > > >This has been a Hockey History List mailing
        > > > ><A HREF=http://www.enol.com/~liebmann/hockey/hockhist.htm>Our
        > >Homepage</A>
        > > > >The Hockey History List is the official mailing list of the Hockey
        > > > Research
        > > > >Association (HRA)
        > > > >
        > > >
        > > > Craig
        > > >
        > > > ===================================================================
        > > > EASY and FREE access to your email anywhere: http://Mailreader.com/
        > > > ===================================================================
        > > >
        > > > > This has been a Hockey History List mailing
        > > > <A HREF=http://www.enol.com/~liebmann/hockey/hockhist.htm>Our
        > >Homepage</A>
        > > > The Hockey History List is the official mailing list of the Hockey
        > >Research Association (HRA)
        > >
        > >>This has been a Hockey History List mailing
        > ><A HREF=http://www.enol.com/~liebmann/hockey/hockhist.htm>Our Homepage</A>
        > >The Hockey History List is the official mailing list of the Hockey Research
        > >Association (HRA)
        > >
        > >
        >
        > > This has been a Hockey History List mailing
        > <A HREF=http://www.enol.com/~liebmann/hockey/hockhist.htm>Our Homepage</A>
        > The Hockey History List is the official mailing list of the Hockey Research Association (HRA)
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.