Lindros will be in the Hall of Fame, and most likely in his first year of eligibility
- Lindros has the 14th highest points per game average in NHL history (He was 5th before the Stevens hit).........everybody above him (aside from Sakic, and Yzerman).....is in the Hall of Fame
- 61% of the HHOF's members had shorter careers/played fewer games - so 'a short career' not an excuse
- averaged 1.5 ppg or higher in 4 seasons (consecutively as well) - only Gretzky and Lemieux can make that claim (Every player in NHL history who is eligible for the hall of Fame and averaged 1.5 points a game more than once - is in the Hall of Fame)
- 2nd highest points per game in the 90s behind Lemieux
- 1 Hart trophy (All players eligible for the Hall of Fame who have won the Hart Trophy except Al Rollins - are in the hall of Fame)
- 1 Pearson trophy ((All players eligible for the Hall of Fame who have won the Pearson Trophy - are in the hall of Fame)
- 6 NHL All-Star Games (All players eligible for the Hall of Fame who have played at least 6 all-star games - are in the hall of Fame)
- 1 NHL First Team All-Star
- 1 NHL Second Team All Star
- 1 Olympic Gold Medal
- 2 World Junior Goild Medals
- 1 Canada Cup Championship
Highest point per game average in Philadelphia Flyer History
Fastest Flyer to 150, 200 and 250 goals
Fastest Flyer to 500 points
Holds Flyer record for most goals in a game (4)
Holds Flyer record for most assists in a game (6)
Holds Flyer record for most points in the playoffs in a season (26)
Eric Lindros is the ONLY Centre in the Gretzky/Lemieux era to be an end of season all-star more than once.
2007-11-08 14:43:13
·
answer #1
·
answered by Like I'm Telling You Who I A 7
·
3⤊
4⤋
Not unless they're unveiling the new crystal-chin wing at the hall.
I'm sure his ppg looks even better if you don't include the last 5 years, but that's not how it should work. The Hall is meant to celebrate a body of work over a career. He didn't score 400 goals, nevermind 500. He also did not post either of the, 1000 points / 1000 games, standard longevity benchmarks for Hall consideration.
Lastly, injuries are not a viable excuse and I'm also not sure why his failure to win a cup should not enter the equation.
I'd give Glenn Anderson, not to mention a host of others, the nod over Lindros. He's borderline at best.
2007-11-09 04:29:03
·
answer #2
·
answered by zapcity29 7
·
0⤊
3⤋
Paul O for Best Answer. Great answer, by the way.
Though it may have been asked before, and might be asked again, way to take the initiative and ask this at such an appropriate time, Jeff. :)
Anyway... Am I horrible person, again, for laughing at what See Leveler said? I'm going to say "yes" this time. In my defense though, I think it's unfortunate that Lindros accomplished less during his career as a player than he probably could have if not for injuries, or... if not for meeting Scott Stevens. I might have opinions not in favor of Lindros winning a Nobel prize or something, but I'm leaning towards being in favor of him being elected to the HOF.
NHLPA work seems like it might be a good fit for him. If so, perhaps he will be appreciated and accoladed for that one day. We'll just have to wait and see.
ADD: Of course, LITY always comes in and owns everyone's face off with statistics. LOL. Thanks again LITY. :)
2007-11-08 22:59:13
·
answer #3
·
answered by Erica 6
·
4⤊
2⤋
Lindros' off-ice probs shouldn't be held against him. He didn't want to play in Quebec because ownership was a mess and the team was about to fold. Remember: Mario Lemieux refused to go to the podium and put on a Pens sweater the day he was drafted because he was in a snit about Pittsburgh. Jean Beleveau refused to play for the Habs at the beginning of his career.
And injuries and winning a cup shouldn't factor into it: He played 100 more games than Bobby Orr who was injured all the time. He had the same kind of career as Boston's Cam Neely who was injury prone and never won a cup but who made it to the hall. Lindros had over 100 more points than Neely and played 40 more games.
LITY: Thanks for doing the legwork once again. It really helps cut throught the blablabla.
ERICA: I thought it was funny too. People who are honest about it and just don't like the guy deserve to be heard.
2007-11-08 22:40:42
·
answer #4
·
answered by Paul O 3
·
3⤊
3⤋
I am going to say yes.
There are so many people in the Hall of Fame now who have no hardware or cups, all of whom have lower goals per game, assists per game, and points per game (not just Neely)
Eric Lindros averaged a point a game or better 9x in 13 seasons. There are 70 players in the Hall of Fame who never did it once and 200 players in the Hall of Fame who didn't do it over the course of their career career.
It's funny because I watched TSN earlier this evening and everybody said statistically he's a no brainer. Bobby Clarke and Gordioe Howe call him one of the 10 greatest players ever. But everybody brings up his attitude, injuries, etc. Screw the injuries..........He averaged over 1.1 points a game over 760 games. Maurice Richard didn't even get a point a game in his career.
If you compare him to the current members of the HOF.......... he's in
If you compare him to his era............he's in.
2007-11-08 23:39:31
·
answer #5
·
answered by Canadian Biology Man 4
·
5⤊
1⤋
That's nothing. I once asked something in wrestling, they wanted it in Tennis.
No. Lindros does not have the stats of a Hall of Famer. He had 3 good seasons and that was it. Plus, he never played an entire season in his career.
2007-11-08 22:56:40
·
answer #6
·
answered by trombass08 6
·
0⤊
3⤋
Yes... not my first choice but yeah. He was dominant for 5 seasons... he has about 350 points behind Modano (who is a cinch for the Hall) in spite of his injuries. He was a disappointment in many ways but he was also a force in the NHL for good and bad... even his defiance to Quebec (which he was reviled for) opened hard nosed negotiations for other players which did benefit the players... but his power and talent and his production is good enough to get him in the Hall.
I'm not a fan of his but fair is fair... there are lesser players in the Hall these days.
2007-11-08 23:03:56
·
answer #7
·
answered by cattledog 7
·
2⤊
1⤋
Eric Lindros? No. Not at all. Not by a long shot. If he dares to skate through the door of the Hall of Fame, someone in the hall will skate out and give him a thunderous hit in his head. He will never be able to get in there. No way!
NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO
I insist.
2007-11-08 22:28:50
·
answer #8
·
answered by See Leveler 4
·
1⤊
4⤋
If you take away all the crap that surrounded him for his whole career(His parents,Bob Clark) and just focus on his hockey playing ability he is a for sure HOFer.
GP-760 G-372 A-493 P-865
Just look he had great stats. If he did not get hurt so many times and play a 20 year career he would be in the 1000+ points.
He had soft hand and hard hips. A formula for a great hockey player. Powerful with great puck moving ability.
2007-11-08 22:16:03
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
3⤋
Stats aren't bad. Won a couple of awards. Dominated the game for a couple years when he was healthy. And career length isn't a determining factor. There are a few guys in there with much shorter careers like Dryden for example.
He just may get in. I don't get to vote so my opinion hardly matters.
2007-11-08 22:48:29
·
answer #10
·
answered by PuckDat 7
·
3⤊
2⤋