Could Bob Gainey have made the Hall of Fame if he didn't play for Montreal?

[Miller Time]

I'm not sure I agree. The base question is an interesting one. Yes, Gainey was a massive part of the Habs dynasty, and he's obviously one of the best defensive forwards ever.

But is Bergeron a relevant historical player without Thomas and Rask? Kopitar without Quick? Toews without Keith and Kane?

Would they be remembered by the average fan in 20 years if not for the players around them, even if they obviously were imperative for their team's winning?

Is there any player you wouldn't ask that question of?

If the question was wether or not said players would've won a cup(s) without their teammates... Sure.

But what made Gainey a unique and rare talent, is not the number of rings he has. The Soviet commentary about him speaks to the recognition of what a special player he was. That recognition has nothing to do with whom his teammates were...

The OPs post wasn't really what my comment was directed at... Though it was an easy answer. Ithe HOF has many players that don't have their name on the Stanley Cup, most of which weren't as impactful hockey players as Gainey was (though most had more points than him).

It's those posters who can't see past points in assessing hockey ability that I was referring to.

 

[tarheelhockey]

There was a massive, massive disparity between the top and bottom of the NHL during Gainey’s prime.

Playing on the Habs meant he was constantly in the spotlight, constantly contributing to wins and Cups, constantly benefiting from close association with superstar HOF’ers. Everything he did carries the aura of “this is how you win 5 Stanley Cups”.

I don’t think it’s realistic to think that he would have received that level of recognition with another organization, no matter his worthiness. A defensive winger requires a high level of team success to even be talked about let alone given awards.

 

[MadLuke]

Maybe on a good team of the time (bruins-flyers) type but at the bottom of the league of the day..... would be harsh to build a legacy.

selke winners all played on good team at some point (that season or prior to build a reputation) I think, Couturier could be an exception outside his Rookie season the flyers were never that special

 

[viceroy]

However, looking through some hockey discussions, I've seen some people call Gainey overrated said that he only really got to being a HOF worthy player because he was part of a dynasty team.

I believe you're thinking of Kevin Lowe.

 

[Toby91ca]

Had the Selke been around earlier, he likely would have the most wins instead of Bergeron.

Not a knock against him as he’s legit, but other than mathematic possibility, there is basically 0% chance he’d have the most wins.

 

[Fatass]

Now, Gainey definitely has the hardware for a Hall of Fame worthy player. He has five Stanley Cups, four Selke Trophies, and one Conn Smythe Trophy. Lots of hardware.

This is not me saying he shouldn't be there by any means. He is widely seen as the exception to the rule for players with his type of stats. He brought more attention to what is commonly an understated part of the game.

However, looking through some hockey discussions, I've seen some people call Gainey overrated said that he only really got to being a HOF worthy player because he was part of a dynasty team.

Do you think he could have made the Hall of Fame if he was playing for someone like the Chicago Blackhawks or the New York Rangers during the time he played in the NHL? Do you think he would have been utilized differently by them and found a different way to become Hall of Fame worthy?

Did you watch him play? If you did, I doubt you start this thread.

 

[Drake1588]

If there is any shred of truth to this assertion, it's only in the sense that any player on a dynasty might be viewed differently if he played on an also-ran club. This isn't a Bob Gainey question, but a dynasty question.

This was a great player and everyone who watched him at the time thought so. Everyone, Habs fan or opposing fan, player or coach. This is only a thread that the young would start, because If you watched him in his prime, Bob Gainey's HOF bona fides are not in doubt. He was incredible. Maybe you had to be there to appreciate it.

 

[zizbuka]

Him and Carbonneau are easy HOFs. Guys who dominate such a specific and important role to that extent deserve to be in. Looking at their offensive numbers is dumb as hell.

It's not just looking at their offensive numbers, it's looking at the total package. Being great defensively, but average offensively, as a forward isn't HOF worthy.

Looking at just defensive numbers is dumb as hell.

 

[Spring in Fialta]

It's not just looking at their offensive numbers, it's looking at the total package. Being great defensively, but average offensively, as a forward isn't HOF worthy.

Looking at just defensive numbers is dumb as hell.

Yeah, well if the fella is the pretty much the a top-5 defensive forward of all-time, I'll tip my hat and let him in the HOF. That's a unique player.

 

[Thierry]

It's not just looking at their offensive numbers, it's looking at the total package. Being great defensively, but average offensively, as a forward isn't HOF worthy.

Looking at just defensive numbers is dumb as hell.

Now, Gainy was not great defensively, he was amazing. By your logic, would you say that a forward that is amazing offensively but average defensively isn't HOF worthy? Because you would have to remove a lot of players then.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Not a simple question.

No doubt a HOF caliber player. Great defensively and was a key cog on those teams.

That being said, does anyone notice him if he plays on the California Seals? I very much doubt it.

Bottom line though, is that he was well deserving of the HOF.

 

[MXD]

If there is any shred of truth to this assertion, it's only in the sense that any player on a dynasty might be viewed differently if he played on an also-ran club. This isn't a Bob Gainey question, but a dynasty question.

This was a great player and everyone who watched him at the time thought so. Everyone, Habs fan or opposing fan, player or coach. This is only a thread that the young would start, because If you watched him in his prime, Bob Gainey's HOF bona fides are not in doubt. He was incredible. Maybe you had to be there to appreciate it.

That was kindof the point I wanted to make regarding Bryan Trottier.

Not a knock against him as he’s legit, but other than mathematic possibility, there is basically 0% chance he’d have the most wins.

I mean, I guess Frank Nighbor would've won a lot of Selkes, if completely we disregard the fact that Nighbor was older than Selke and thus the award would've never be named the Frank Selke for a lack of reason to do so.

 

[Midnight Judges]

I'm not knocking Bob Gainey, but I am going to knock modern Selke voters:

Does Bob Gainey win the vote for any Selke trophies at all in the modern NHL?

Lately, Selke votes have converted from their original purpose "to the forward who best excels in the defensive aspects of the game.”

More into:

"to the best star player who contributes defense"

or worse:

"to my favorite player who has declined offensively but I want to pretend he hasn't declined offensively by pretending he's just focusing more on defense even though there is no evidence for that and so even though he basically doesn't penalty kill or shut anyone down and the opposing teams score quite a lot when he's on the ice, I doubt most fans will look at the actual data so I'm just going to use the Selke to pump up my guy."

Since the lockout, the absolute worst offensive player to win the Selke was 99th in points, but they're actually almost always in the top 60, and quite often they are top 30.

In the recent 6 or 7 years, among players with Gainey's offensive performance, only Jordan Staal received significant consideration and Anthony Cirelli some lesser consideration. Virtually everyone else that is consistently on the Selke ballots is a top 100 offensive player.

Bob Gainey never cracked the top 150 in points in any season in his entire career. In other words, NOBODY with his level of offense has won a Selke in the past 19 years.

And without Selke trophies in the modern NHL, there would be virtually zero chance a player like Bob Gainey makes the hall of fame. So yeah, I'm going to say if you transport him to another team in another time, maybe he's in the hall of very good.

And again, that is not to say he doesn't deserve it. That's to say the modern NHL voters have perverted their Selke votes into something other than defensive value on the ice.

 

[ffh]

Think he'll take the cups as a consolation

 

[Toby91ca]

I mean, I guess Frank Nighbor would've won a lot of Selkes, if completely we disregard the fact that Nighbor was older than Selke and thus the award would've never be named the Frank Selke for a lack of reason to do so.

Not sure what your point here is. My point was this: Gainey won his 1st of 4 Selke's in year 5 of his career (when the trophy was introduced). For him to be the leader in number of Selke's, he would have had to win it in 3 of the first 4 years of his career as well. That simply had no chance of happening whether the award existed or not.

 

[MXD]

Not sure what your point here is. My point was this: Gainey won his 1st of 4 Selke's in year 5 of his career (when the trophy was introduced). For him to be the leader in number of Selke's, he would have had to win it in 3 of the first 4 years of his career as well. That simply had no chance of happening whether the award existed or not.

Eh.... Considering the whole point of the award was to reward players like Gainey, as opposed to players like Bobby Clarke... Probably?

 

[Jee]

yes

 

[PaulD]

I'm not sure I agree. The base question is an interesting one. Yes, Gainey was a massive part of the Habs dynasty, and he's obviously one of the best defensive forwards ever.

But is Bergeron a relevant historical player without Thomas and Rask? Kopitar without Quick? Toews without Keith and Kane?

Would they be remembered by the average fan in 20 years if not for the players around them, even if they obviously were imperative for their team's winning?

"would they be remembered by the average fan in twenty years if not for great players around them." ?????
What kind of made up measuring stick is that?
Do you watch hockey?

 

[cneely]

Obviously lol
What a weird question

Patrice Bergeron is going in the HOF because he won a bunch of times the award they created to give to Gainey because he was the best at it (and arguably still the best)

Other teams might have won the Stanley Cup more if they had a guys like Gainey to stop the offense of super stacked teams like the 70s Habs

Bergeron - 1,040 career points, 0.80 ppg avg
Gainey - 585 career points, 0.50 ppg avg

Even if he was better defensively (which is debatable), Gainey was no where near the all around player Bergeron was.

 

[bobholly39]

I think Montreal definitely helped him. Being a big part of arguably the greatest team ever (and the 4 consecutive cup wins) is huge.

If he had played on a bottom feeder team with almost 0 playoff success - he probably stands out a bit less.

Of course - it's a bit of a butterfly effect question. If instead of playing for Montreal he played for a bottom feeder, whose to say his individual career doesn't benefit. Maybe we even scee a crazy scenario where a defensive minded forward wins the hart trophy one year? Lots of ways this could play out to actually help him, so you never know.

 

[Miller Time]

It's not just looking at their offensive numbers, it's looking at the total package. Being great defensively, but average offensively, as a forward isn't HOF worthy.

Looking at just defensive numbers is dumb as hell.

Looking at numbers alone to form one's opinion is perhaps the dumbest of all

 

[Gregor Samsa]

As someone who played on those 70’s Canadien teams I would say he would definitely be in regardless of where he played. We were a stacked team but he was a big part of that stack

 

[koyvoo]

As someone who played on those 70’s Canadien teams I would say he would definitely be in regardless of where he played. We were a stacked team but he was a big part of that stack

You be who?

 

[Finster8]

If he played for any of the bad team his D game would still be outstanding and then add another 15G + 15A for more quality TOI on PP Top line. Nothing is going to change when you are in the corner battling for a puck, he comes out with it 7/10 times. Forechecking his ass off and always in position in theD zone. Facets of the game that go unnoticed often aren’t on the score sheet in the 70s+80’s

 

[Albatros]

He'd have needed to find significant success somewhere else then, playing in Pittsburgh or Washington he never ever gets in.