Ok Let's talk about Doug Gilmour | Page 2 | HFBoards - NHL Message Board and Forum for National Hockey League
Toggle sidebar

Ok Let's talk about Doug Gilmour

  • Thread starter Thread starter Randall Graves*
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Big Phil said:
Look this alleged sex with a teenage babysitter. I don't know every intimate detail about it other than the fact it happened in St. Louis sometime in 1987-'88. Gilmour was 24-25 then. This babysitter would have been 16. A little young? Perhaps, and if I'm the girl's father I'd wouldnt be amused but IIRC there were no charges that stuck and he got traded to Calgary after '88 and the whole St. Louis incident was forgotten. Sometimes people think that Gilmour was 40 years old when this happened but just to clear it up, he wasn't he was a fairly young man at the time not too far removed from a teen himself.
Click to expand...

you've got to be kidding. there's a ten year age gap. one is 14 years old and the other is a celebrity, making hundreds of thousands of dollars a year, and solidly in his mid-20s. now, i don't know if it was "consensual" (insofar as a 14 year old girl could consent under these circumstances), but this-look-the-other-way nonsense when it comes to our sports stars, combined with the hush money and, probably more significantly, the pressure exerted by the owners of sports teams makes me sick. guys with hundreds of millions, if not billions of dollars, who have their hands in every institution in town vs. the family of some teenage girl who babysits to make extra money... you really think the family's going to press charges? mario lemieux, dan quinn, brian sakic, henrik tallinder, andreas lilja, kristian huselieus, i'm not saying all those guys are guilty because obviously i don't know, but it's attitudes like this that prevent the alleged rapists from any kind of real investigation and that prevent us from ever knowing the truth.

all that said, gilmour will eventually be in the hall of fame. it'll take some time, like anderson, but his playoff numbers, his spot on the all-time scoring list, plus the boost that his cult status in toronto gives him should make him undeniable... eventually. by the HHOF's criteria, he's no hull, robitaille, yzerman, or leetch, or even adam oates. in a way, as much as gilmour gets overrated for his amazing seasons in toronto, his time in st. louis gets seriously underrated and it balances out. but i really doubt that this incident that happened more than twenty years ago that no one really wants to talk about is going to impede his chances.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Primary Assist
greatgazoo said:
Umm, I do believe that's still considered statutory **** in some states. The reason it went away....can you say "hush money"? Oh, BTW...the girl in question was 14!!! and he was 25. Does that change your opinion?

Here's the proof..
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=940DE2D71139F93BA15751C1A96E948260
Click to expand...

That might be the most detailed article I have seen in a while on that issue, but to me just by reading that all I see is a guy who denies the accusations. Far as anyone knows he is innocent. I am not going to pretend to know that I have all the facts from behind the scenes and while there could have been "hush money" I am just going to go by the actual outcome of the case.

BTW - His first wife, Robyn, not sure when he divorced her, but when he was in Toronto his wife was Amy.

Either way, I do believe that the HHOF might have that on the back burner when evaluating him
 
Gilmour should definitely be in the Hall of Fame. He was a top 5 player in the NHL in the mid 90's and had a great career overall.
 
vadim sharifijanov said:
you've got to be kidding. there's a ten year age gap. one is 14 years old and the other is a celebrity, making hundreds of thousands of dollars a year, and solidly in his mid-20s. now, i don't know if it was "consensual" (insofar as a 14 year old girl could consent under these circumstances), but this-look-the-other-way nonsense when it comes to our sports stars, combined with the hush money and, probably more significantly, the pressure exerted by the owners of sports teams makes me sick. guys with hundreds of millions, if not billions of dollars, who have their hands in every institution in town vs. the family of some teenage girl who babysits to make extra money... you really think the family's going to press charges? mario lemieux, dan quinn, brian sakic, henrik tallinder, andreas lilja, kristian huselieus, i'm not saying all those guys are guilty because obviously i don't know, but it's attitudes like this that prevent the alleged rapists from any kind of real investigation and that prevent us from ever knowing the truth.

all that said, gilmour will eventually be in the hall of fame. it'll take some time, like anderson, but his playoff numbers, his spot on the all-time scoring list, plus the boost that his cult status in toronto gives him should make him undeniable... eventually. by the HHOF's criteria, he's no hull, robitaille, yzerman, or leetch, or even adam oates. in a way, as much as gilmour gets overrated for his amazing seasons in toronto, his time in st. louis gets seriously underrated and it balances out. but i really doubt that this incident that happened more than twenty years ago that no one really wants to talk about is going to impede his chances.
Click to expand...

I see your point and I agree with you on that. I am just trying to give him the benefit of the doubt. If it is true that money stopped this thing from going further than it wouldnt be the first time this happened in the world of sports. I was always under the impression that she was 16 not 14. Not saying that Gilmour was a saint if she was 16 either. And while tons of sports stars have abused their celebrity by doing this exact type of thing there are others that I believe have been wrongly accused of such things. I don't believe I am in any position to prove which one is which on this situation.

But yes I do seriously believe that in some shape or form the HHOF keeps this in mind. Dino Ciccarelli may not have the HHOF credentials on the ice to get in, but I don't think it helps that he was arrested for indecent exposure either. That'll help him never get in IMO. Gilmour was not at a Kobe Bryant level, or A-Rod, or Kirby Puckett for that matter. All these guys had shady much publicized lives outside of their sport. Had Gilmour been at an even higher level it wouldnt matter, but while he is a legit HHOFer in my book there are still some out there that make a case against him, and in that case if the HHOF doesnt like you for some reason, well, good luck
 
Randall Graves said:
Oates was a great great playmaker...but Gilmour was a better all around player, not that close really..
Click to expand...

I agree, Gilmour was the better player. And I'm a life-long Bruins fan. Gilmour was more competitive, you could sense his will to win, much like Bobbie Clarke's. Better goal scorer, better defensively, much more physical and a leader. Oates was the better playmaker, one of the best ever.
 
What makes Brett Hull so solidly in the top 100 and Gilmour left out. Both cracked the top 10 in points 3 times, both have the same amount of playoff and regular season points. However, Gilmour was the vastly superior defensive player, yet hull is better because he was great at one dimension of hockey.
 
Gilmour was a great player, but overhyped by the Canadian media, just like Gary Roberts
 
I think Gilmour should be in the HHOF. The guy puts uo 1414 points with a points/game average of 0.96. Of course he was something special :handclap:

/Cheers
 
ushvinder said:
What makes Brett Hull so solidly in the top 100 and Gilmour left out. Both cracked the top 10 in points 3 times, both have the same amount of playoff and regular season points. However, Gilmour was the vastly superior defensive player, yet hull is better because he was great at one dimension of hockey.
Click to expand...

Just for starters; A Hart Trophy, a Pearson, and three straight years of being the most dangerous offensive force in the league.
 
Last edited:
Gilmour was my most hated player growing up and would be a lock if I had my way. There was a true impact player, all over the ice, on and off the scoreboard, in the corners, in girls' panties, wherever. Give me a prime Gilmour over Hull, Oates, Francis and Robitaille any time.
 
lextune said:
Just for starters; A Hart Trophy, a Pearson, and three straight years of being the most dangerous offensive force in the league.
Click to expand...

As a counter arguement, for 3 different years Doug Gilmour was top 5-8 in offensive scoring while being a better two way player than anyone else in the top 10 during those 3 years that he cracked the elite scorers. Not to mention strong playoff runs, how many legendary playoff runs does Gilmour have, that's right he has 5.
 
ushvinder said:
As a counter arguement, for 3 different years Doug Gilmour was top 5-8 in offensive scoring while being a better two way player than anyone else in the top 10 during those 3 years that he cracked the elite scorers. Not to mention strong playoff runs, how many legendary playoff runs does Gilmour have, that's right he has 5.
Click to expand...

I understand what you are saing ushvinder, but you might be forgetting how great of a playoff performer Hull was as well. The guy has got to be the most underrated clutch goal scorer in the history of the NHL. Forget "the goal" in '99 that everyone talks about when Hull's name is brought up how about his time in St. Louis? He was great in the playoffs then as well. Dallas? Yeap. Detroit? Still pretty good. Team USA? Damn I hated him as a Canadian. And while I was not an Oiler fan, a guy like Hull burned them enough times.

I would have a hard time picking a prime Gilmour over Hull. Not that it isnt close, because it certainly is, but a guy that had 70+ goals three years in a row would keep me up at nights. Oates was a big set up man in those three big years but are you forgetting how lethal he still was after Hull left? He had goal scoring years of 54, 57, 29 (lockout), 43 and 42. He was 2nd in goals to Bure in '93-94. Could have been a 2nd team all-star in '94 and I don't think it would have been a bad choice. Hull scored wherever he went. But don't penalize the guy because he had an amazing set up man helping him, Hull's a HHOFer, he didnt need it
 
  • Like
Reactions: Yozhik v tumane
Randall Graves said:
Inspired by the 2009 hall of fame thread..

I am shocked there are people questioning whether or not he should get in.
.
Click to expand...

I know! You'd think he'd peed on some teenage babysitter or something.....


whoops!:sarcasm:



all kidding aside. Gilmore was never at the level of the gretzky and lemeiux but he sure threatened the Yzermans. Amongst the best of the rest he was certainly consistenly great (inspite of his physical shortcomings). Definately a star player for a long period of time as well as a driven leader. He'll get in.. no doubt


'specially if Cam "two good seasons" Neely's in there.
:laugh:

Watch some run of the mill nhl'er that happened to string together 3 or 4thirty goal seasons is going to sue for entry into the hall under the "Cam Neely Exemption";)
 
Big Phil said:
And in my honest opinion that has got to be a reason as to why he isnt in there. I thought he would get in as soon as possible in 2006. Then 2007 came along and it's hard to unseat Mess, Mac, Stevens and Francis. But then I thought 2008 was a lock. Something is fishy, that is all I can say, the majority of us would consider Gilmour well above a marginal borderline Hall of Famer and there is no reason why the HHOF committee wouldnt agree.

Look this alleged sex with a teenage babysitter. I don't know every intimate detail about it other than the fact it happened in St. Louis sometime in 1987-'88. Gilmour was 24-25 then. This babysitter would have been 16. A little young? Perhaps, and if I'm the girl's father I'd wouldnt be amused but IIRC there were no charges that stuck and he got traded to Calgary after '88 and the whole St. Louis incident was forgotten. Sometimes people think that Gilmour was 40 years old when this happened but just to clear it up, he wasn't he was a fairly young man at the time not too far removed from a teen himself.
Click to expand...


phil .. your grotesqueness never ceases to amaze me. She was 14.

How is it that you unleash your judgement and venom on a 19yr old BOY that gets called the N-word by a 40yr old man but a 14yr old gets repeatedly "diddled" by a 24yr old and hey... that's just kids being kids.

your respect just went a few more notches down..

ick :shakehead
 
Last edited:
the_speedster said:
phil .. your grotesqueness never ceases to amaze me. She was 14.

How is it that you unleash your judgement and venom on a 19yr old BOY that gets called the N-word by a 40yr old man but a 14yr old gets repeatedly "diddled" by a 24yr old and hey... that's just kids being kids.

your respect just went a few more notches down..

ick :shakehead
Click to expand...

Speedster if you bothered to read on you would realize I did not condone this type of behaviour but thought at the time that it was a 16 year old, not 14, which would have narrowed the gap a bit. Not that it is right, but neither one of us can stand up here and judge a guy that never got charged or even suspended from the NHL. This could be an allegation and nothing more. You mean to tell me that you think it isnt possible that the girl in question fabricated the story? Were you a fly on the wall? No, you werent, so who are you to judge about something that was never proven?

Gilmour is past the borderline HHOF thing anyways, he is too good to not get in the HHOF. Ciccarelli is borderline and his off ice actions hurt him. Gilmour's off ice "allegations" (keep that word in mind) is what I suspect has hurt him so far, so personally I think you are fairly quick to judge on a guy that repeatedly denied these claims.

BTW - If that last thing you are refering to was Trevor Daley, yes I do believe that should have been dealt within the team. Daley, while I'm sure got bad advice from others, pulled what I can only call a "Shayne Corson" syndrome by walking out on his team. I will give him a break for being 19 though.
 
Big Phil said:
Speedster if you bothered to read on you would realize I did not condone this type of behaviour but thought at the time that it was a 16 year old, not 14, which would have narrowed the gap a bit. Not that it is right, but neither one of us can stand up here and judge a guy that never got charged or even suspended from the NHL. This could be an allegation and nothing more. You mean to tell me that you think it isnt possible that the girl in question fabricated the story? Were you a fly on the wall? No, you werent, so who are you to judge about something that was never proven?

Gilmour is past the borderline HHOF thing anyways, he is too good to not get in the HHOF. Ciccarelli is borderline and his off ice actions hurt him. Gilmour's off ice "allegations" (keep that word in mind) is what I suspect has hurt him so far, so personally I think you are fairly quick to judge on a guy that repeatedly denied these claims.

BTW - If that last thing you are refering to was Trevor Daley, yes I do believe that should have been dealt within the team. Daley, while I'm sure got bad advice from others, pulled what I can only call a "Shayne Corson" syndrome by walking out on his team. I will give him a break for being 19 though.
Click to expand...

Robert Gordon Orr, .. his agent (who advised him to go home rather than take beezers insult) says Hi :)

Number 4 is more of a hall of famer to me for his attitude OFF the ice than on..

too bad its not infectious:shakehead
 
Phil said it best. It was just an allegation, and that's all it will ever be. If it's true... oh well, not illegal, just pretty greasy. How long do we hold something against someone, that they may or may not have done, when they were 24-25?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Latest posts

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom