Players on Whom Public Opinion Has Changed Drastically Since Retirement...
- Thread starter DitchMarner
- Start date
-
Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates
Crosby2010
Registered User
- Mar 4, 2023
- 1,681
- 1,675
I think with the Islanders dynasty how can you go wrong with the trio of Potvin, Trottier or Bossy from a career standpoint? Pick one of them and you're in good shape regardless. For me I always thought Potvin being the leader on the back end is a hard guy to unseat from that dynasty and I think he might be the most important one and thus also had the best career. But Trottier's two way play and Bossy's consistent great goal scoring in the regular season and playoffs will always give me pause and I can see why some might pick the other two. If there was someone who I would say it was "their" team, it is Potvin though. Being the defenseman on the back end, being the captain, etc.
As for the question, usually it is guys who fans tend to look back on with more rose coloured glasses that get rated higher. Players that are in the Hall of Fame that shouldn't be. No one thought Phil Housley was a Hall of Famer when he was playing. You wouldn't have suggested it. You may have thought Gary Suter was one before he would be, and Suter wasn't getting that HHOF love either. But as time goes on and people forget the warts of the player and look at his stats then things look prettier. You gloss over things with them. Alex Mogilny to me has to be the biggest candidate for this. It was a running joke that he dogged it but did well in a contract year. Mogilny was in his prime years (or should have been) when he got traded to New Jersey and I can remember it barely being a blip on the screen when he got traded to a contender. Turgeon comes to mind as well, maybe even Nicholls. Tkachuk certainly has benefitted a lot from both of his sons playing well in the NHL and sort of giving himself a 2nd wind to re-examine his career. None of them should be in the HHOF, but some are and some are considered. I don't think any of them were among the elite players at their position, if not at all or at least too short of a time. Tkachuk was well known as a guy who should have been tailor made for the playoffs but didn't produce.
Then I guess there is the flip side. I think Lanny McDonald, Mike Vernon, Gerry Cheevers are guys that are in the HHOF and two of them got in pretty quick, but they are names where many don't like them in there. I think McDonald is fine in there. He had a nice prime, his numbers look worse career wise because he started off slow and ended off slow. But he belongs. I think Cheevers does too. I don't think Vernon does, but if this is 2002 and he just retired the assumption is he gets in someday. I can remember he was interviewed in 2005 when someone asked if he was "snubbed" getting into the HHOF on his first shot and he sort of just shrugged. In other words, I think at the time Vernon was thought to be a guy that should get in.
I'll also say there are sports-media types that change the mood of how a player is viewed who didn't likely have that sort of fandom while they were playing. I never remember Nieuwendyk or Andreychuk ever being considered "future HHOFers". But they retire and get in. Nieuwendyk gets in in his 2nd year of eligibility. Andreychuk waits longer, but the media narrative definitely puts both of them in there. I think the same might happen to Patrick Marleau. Where as the media will push the whole "games played record" and gloss over everything else about him in that he wasn't ever considered a star player, but their gushing over him will overlook all of that. Scott Niedermayer during his first retirement in 2007 that lasted half a season got the royal treatment and was pumped way too high up the list of all-time great defensemen. Meanwhile, there are two players who played with him who everyone would rank as a better defenseman (Stevens, Pronger) and even when the Devils were winning I would say Rafalski was every bit as important to those teams. But he retired on a high and the media loved that.
I am going to insert Corey Perry as this same guy too. They are already pushing his whole "he won everything at every level" type of thing and especially if he walks away with a Cup with Edmonton they'll love it.
As for the question, usually it is guys who fans tend to look back on with more rose coloured glasses that get rated higher. Players that are in the Hall of Fame that shouldn't be. No one thought Phil Housley was a Hall of Famer when he was playing. You wouldn't have suggested it. You may have thought Gary Suter was one before he would be, and Suter wasn't getting that HHOF love either. But as time goes on and people forget the warts of the player and look at his stats then things look prettier. You gloss over things with them. Alex Mogilny to me has to be the biggest candidate for this. It was a running joke that he dogged it but did well in a contract year. Mogilny was in his prime years (or should have been) when he got traded to New Jersey and I can remember it barely being a blip on the screen when he got traded to a contender. Turgeon comes to mind as well, maybe even Nicholls. Tkachuk certainly has benefitted a lot from both of his sons playing well in the NHL and sort of giving himself a 2nd wind to re-examine his career. None of them should be in the HHOF, but some are and some are considered. I don't think any of them were among the elite players at their position, if not at all or at least too short of a time. Tkachuk was well known as a guy who should have been tailor made for the playoffs but didn't produce.
Then I guess there is the flip side. I think Lanny McDonald, Mike Vernon, Gerry Cheevers are guys that are in the HHOF and two of them got in pretty quick, but they are names where many don't like them in there. I think McDonald is fine in there. He had a nice prime, his numbers look worse career wise because he started off slow and ended off slow. But he belongs. I think Cheevers does too. I don't think Vernon does, but if this is 2002 and he just retired the assumption is he gets in someday. I can remember he was interviewed in 2005 when someone asked if he was "snubbed" getting into the HHOF on his first shot and he sort of just shrugged. In other words, I think at the time Vernon was thought to be a guy that should get in.
I'll also say there are sports-media types that change the mood of how a player is viewed who didn't likely have that sort of fandom while they were playing. I never remember Nieuwendyk or Andreychuk ever being considered "future HHOFers". But they retire and get in. Nieuwendyk gets in in his 2nd year of eligibility. Andreychuk waits longer, but the media narrative definitely puts both of them in there. I think the same might happen to Patrick Marleau. Where as the media will push the whole "games played record" and gloss over everything else about him in that he wasn't ever considered a star player, but their gushing over him will overlook all of that. Scott Niedermayer during his first retirement in 2007 that lasted half a season got the royal treatment and was pumped way too high up the list of all-time great defensemen. Meanwhile, there are two players who played with him who everyone would rank as a better defenseman (Stevens, Pronger) and even when the Devils were winning I would say Rafalski was every bit as important to those teams. But he retired on a high and the media loved that.
I am going to insert Corey Perry as this same guy too. They are already pushing his whole "he won everything at every level" type of thing and especially if he walks away with a Cup with Edmonton they'll love it.
Gerulaitis
Registered User
- Apr 19, 2024
- 232
- 150
MadLuke
Registered User
- Jan 18, 2011
- 10,954
- 6,431
Maurice Richard maybe ? Not so sure where the general public is too, those with an opinion is maybe similar to the 1960 public opinion, but that one where the romance, spectacle, overtime playoff clutch moments, winning could have influenced the opinion quite a bit and die off over time.
1992-1993 perhaps?
Tied for most goals amongst wingers (and in the NHL as a whole)
Best GPG in the league and best PPG for wingers.
MadLuke
Registered User
- Jan 18, 2011
- 10,954
- 6,431
With Yzerman-Oates-Lemieux-Gretzky-Gilmour-Fedorov-Sakic-Messier, etc... all playing center, Mogilny being the best winger before the leg injury is a perfectly reasonable opinion (over the Selanne, Robitaille, Stevens, Bure, Hull, Fleury, etc...).
Hull was out his giant peak, Kurri over 30, Jagr yet to enter his prime
Hull was out his giant peak, Kurri over 30, Jagr yet to enter his prime
jigglysquishy
Registered User
Ya, circa 1960 I think Richard as the greatest player of all time would have been the most popular opinion.
Even into the 90s, Richard ahead of anyone but the Big Four was common. He finished 5th on the Hockey News list and 3rd on Bowman's list. Certainly, reading contemporary opinion he's treated with near religious reverence.
vadim sharifijanov
Registered User
- Oct 10, 2007
- 30,072
- 18,517
i think the consensus on sawchuk/plante/hall has been all over the place through my lifetime
i expect roy/hasek/brodeur will be much the same in the future
i expect roy/hasek/brodeur will be much the same in the future
Ad
Upcoming events
-
NFC Semifinal Los Angeles Rams @ Philadelphia EaglesWagers: 5Staked: $3,534.00Event closes- Updated:
-
-
Championship Ohio State (#8) vs Notre Dame (#7) - Mercedes-Benz Stadium, AtlantaWagers: 6Staked: $10,911.00Event closes- Updated:
-
PICK ONLY ONE TEAM - 4 Nations Face-Off - ChampionWagers: 5Staked: $2,545.00Event closes - 25 days from now- Updated:
-