Pat Verbeek - Hall of Fame?
- Thread starter ginopuck
- Start date
What's next? A "Martin Lapointe - HHOFer?" thread? **** it, just let everybody in at this point. Mike Gartner is already in. Can't get any worse, right? Compilers unite!
Last edited by a moderator:
Eisen
Registered User
Just no. He was useful and a great player, but no, just no. I don't see any case. You said it yourself, no achievements worth mentioning apart from career numbers. That's the can of worms that Dino opened.
tony d
Registered User
I always liked Verbeek, the guy was a tremendous player and goal scorer. That said I doubt he makes it into the Hall of Fame.
VanIslander
A 20-year ATDer on HfBoards
- Sep 4, 2004
- 35,134
- 7,192
No. I saw both the little ball of hate and dino play their whole careers and there's an important difference: Verbeek has no all-time great elite skill. Dino, however, was the best player I have ever seen at screens, deflections and rebounds. His ability to park himself by the crease, tke abuse, draw penalties and tip and bury loose pucks by the crease was utterly mind boggling. His 600 goals do not reflect all those screens drawn penalty pp markers he was instrumental in having happen.
Exactly, a good piece to a team but never the main one and nothing stands out to make him a HHOF player.
This is one of my pet peeves when it comes to hockey fandom. Mentioning penalty minutes as if it was a good thing. Penalty minutes does not mean the player is tough. It means that he wasn't skilled enough to do his job without resorting to illegal methods. It also means that cost his own team scoring chances and gave the other team scoring chances.
In Pat Verbeek's case those PiMs were how a small guy carved out the space he needed to be effective.
I loved Verbeek. Guy was absoultely fearless and would not take crap from anyone no matter how big they were. Made a career of being undersized but willing to go into every hard and dirty area to get the job done.
That being said, not a Hall of Famer. Hall of Totally Awesome, perhaps, but not Hall of Fame.
I loved Verbeek. Guy was absoultely fearless and would not take crap from anyone no matter how big they were. Made a career of being undersized but willing to go into every hard and dirty area to get the job done.
That being said, not a Hall of Famer. Hall of Totally Awesome, perhaps, but not Hall of Fame.
Psycho Papa Joe
Porkchop Hoser
Basically a much weaker case than Ciccarelli, a similar player, who's already borderline.
Last edited:
tarheelhockey
Offside Review Specialist
TheMoreYouKnow
Registered User
reckoning
Registered User
- Jan 4, 2005
- 7,034
- 1,572
No disrespect intended, he was a fine player, but I don't see an argument for him. If he got in, he'd probably replace Gillies as the person most often named on this board as the worst player in the Hall of Fame.
Good comparables for him might be Danny Gare or Rick Tocchet; neither of whom would ever be seriously considered for the HHOF.
Good comparables for him might be Danny Gare or Rick Tocchet; neither of whom would ever be seriously considered for the HHOF.
Eisen
Registered User
True, he was a lot better at that. But such considerations rarely get you in the Hall, or am I off here? Serious question, does stuff like that get recognized a lot?
Big Phil
Registered User
- Nov 2, 2003
- 31,703
- 4,179
Pat Verbeek we are talking about? He had 12 points in a postseason once. Then 10. Then...........9. Altogether now he had 62 points in 117 games. Not very impressive.
In all honesty, Verbeek is the most unusual 500 goal man. Guys like Francis and Turgeon who were more often thought to be playmakers are guys who I think were more likely to hit 500 goals - and they did. Verbeek never cracked 90 points in a very high scoring era. Even as I look at his stats I still can't see how he got 500 goals and if I think about him from when he was playing he was thought to be a poorer version of Fleury (definitely not as good) but no one ever thought of Verbeek as a sniper back then.
And while we're at it, I know people have a dislike for Gartner being in the HHOF, but there is little doubt in my mind Gartner was a clear cut better player and definitely a much more elite sniper and goalscorer.
Either way, Verbeek is not a HHOFer.
Epsilon
#basta
Verbeek would be a borderline candidate for the Hall of Very Good. He's nowhere close to HOF-quality.
OrrNumber4
Registered User
- Jul 25, 2002
- 16,076
- 7,305
agreed. He had what? 15 consecutive 30-goal seasons and only reason the streak ended was the lockout.
I consider myself a very tough judge for the HOF, in all sports. For one, I HATE that the Football HOF has a minimum of four inductees per year, by rule. To me, that is ridiculous, if in a given year you only have 2 people worthy, or NONE, then that is how many get in.
With that in mind, with hockey I think of it in 2 ways. For players whose game was offense, was he dominant to the point where other teams prepared for him. Was he the type of player that a coach said, "Let's not let Gretzky (for arguments sake) beat us." Was he a guy that other teams game planned to shut down, basically feared when he had the puck on the attack or his team had the puck in the offensive zone with him on the ice? And, did he maintain that level for ~10 years? Now, you may say that it is not a lot of players, well yeah, it is the hall of fame.
For players whose game was defense, was he a guy that his team used to shut down the above said offensive player and did he do so in a dominant matter for ~10 years?
In either aspect, was the player one of the top 3 or 4 at his position when he played and for a long period of time. Doesn't mean they couldn't have a bad year here and there, but generally for the life of his career. There should not be any doubt if the player is a HOF'er. If you have to think about it, he shouldn't be in, in any sport.
I liked Verbeek, but he is just not of that level.
With that in mind, with hockey I think of it in 2 ways. For players whose game was offense, was he dominant to the point where other teams prepared for him. Was he the type of player that a coach said, "Let's not let Gretzky (for arguments sake) beat us." Was he a guy that other teams game planned to shut down, basically feared when he had the puck on the attack or his team had the puck in the offensive zone with him on the ice? And, did he maintain that level for ~10 years? Now, you may say that it is not a lot of players, well yeah, it is the hall of fame.
For players whose game was defense, was he a guy that his team used to shut down the above said offensive player and did he do so in a dominant matter for ~10 years?
In either aspect, was the player one of the top 3 or 4 at his position when he played and for a long period of time. Doesn't mean they couldn't have a bad year here and there, but generally for the life of his career. There should not be any doubt if the player is a HOF'er. If you have to think about it, he shouldn't be in, in any sport.
I liked Verbeek, but he is just not of that level.
Epsilon
#basta
Not to go too far off-topic but you can't really compare the NFL to the NHL. When there are so many players on a football field at the same time, several on both sides of the ball can have a huge impact, and careers on average are shorter (especially for elite players at certain positions), you are going to naturally have more legitimate candidates per year than in a sport like hockey or baseball. Consider that even with the NFL's induction rules, there are a number of players currently on the outside looking in at the HOF who many regard as very strong candidates.
Slapshooter
Registered User
- Apr 25, 2007
- 717
- 2
Many (including me) thinks that Glenn Anderson, Mike Gartner or Dino Ciccarelli did not earn their spots at HOF and Verbeek was usually rated below them when they all played during the same time.
I liked Verbeek's dirty scoring touch, but he was never, not even a moment, considered as an elite player.
Yes. Ciccarelli's player profile and playing style was similar to Verbeek's. However, while Ciccarelli was not actually elite player either, Dino had 608 goals in 1230 games. Verbeek had 522 in 1422. A big difference, especially when their intangibles are on the same level.
I liked Verbeek's dirty scoring touch, but he was never, not even a moment, considered as an elite player.
Psycho Papa Joe said:
Yes. Ciccarelli's player profile and playing style was similar to Verbeek's. However, while Ciccarelli was not actually elite player either, Dino had 608 goals in 1230 games. Verbeek had 522 in 1422. A big difference, especially when their intangibles are on the same level.
I agree, but it is the concept that there has to be a minimum. Personally, I think the NFL's method is a joke and was never more evidenced than this year.
Users who are viewing this thread
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
Series Talk: WCF: [C2] Dallas Stars vs. [P3] Edmonton Oilers (EDM Leads 3-1) (49 Viewers)- Latest: CashMash
-
