The HHOF Inductions of Bill Barber And Steve Shutt

[GlitchMarner]

I was born in 1985 and started watching hockey in '93. I'm not going to pretend I watched these two players or know all about their careers.

However, I am curious as to whether their inductions into the HHOF never seem to be mentioned among the weaker or more questionable ones. In recent years, people constantly malign the inductions of Housley, Andreychuk and Duff (and now Carbonneau and Lowe). Main board users sometimes are critical of the inductions of certain recent players: Kariya ("short career"), Sundin ("didn't win anything") or Modano ("got in because of Nationality") etc. Posters in the HOH section tend to cite "compilers" (Ciccarelli, Gartner etc), players who probably wouldn't have been inducted with less team success (Anderson, Gllies etc) or players who were very good but weren't quite elite NHL players (Federko, Nieuwendyk, Mullen etc) as weaker HOF inductees. But I pretty much never see any criticism of Barber's induction or Shutt's.

On paper, neither player's career looks special enough to be Hall-worthy.


To provide a simple overview:


Steve Shutt:


1976: 27th in League scoring (80 GP)

1977: Third in NHL scoring (60 goals) - 80 GP

1978: 12th in League scoring (80 GP)

1979: 24th in NHL scoring (72 GP) - 19th in PPG among players who played at least 80 games

1980: 19th in League scoring (77 GP)

1981: 43rd in NHL scoring (77 GP)


In a six season prime, he was a top ten scorer once, a top 20 scorer three times and a top 30 scorer five times.

He does have very good playoffs stats: 98 points in 99 games (won five Cups)

Bill Barber:


1974: 27th in League scoring (75 GP)

1975: 36th in NHL scoring (79 GP)

1976: Fourth in League scoring (50 goals) - 80 GP

1977: Outside the top 50 in scoring

1978: 26th in NHL scoring

1979: 20th in League scoring (79 GP)

1980: 43rd in NHL scoring (79 GP)

1981: 23rd in League scoring (80 GP)

1982: 25th in NHL scoring (80 GP)


In a nine season prime, he was a top ten scorer once, a top 20 scorer twice and a top 30 scorer six times.

He also has good playoff stats: 108 points in 129 games (won two Cups).



Superficially, these two players appear to me to be at a Joe Nieuwendyk or Glenn Anderson level at best in terms of Hall-worthiness. Neither one has super impressive longevity (like a Gartner) or an incredibly high peak (outside of a single season spike for each anyway).

How come no one mentions them when talking about whether recent inductees are "lowering the bar"?

 

[Passchendaele]

I'm not sure what either one of them has on Pierre Larouche.

 

[seventieslord]

Not defending either nomination all that fiercely, but, when they played, it seemed that the vast majority of the best forwards were centers - more than any other time in history. So, if you look at their dominance strictly as wingers, they look as good as many others who made it. Going by how dominant they were in the league as a whole, no, they don't look all that great. I frequently cite Shutt as one of the 25 NHL-era HHOFers I'd remove in favour of another 25. Barber was probably the 3rd best defensive winger of his generation, so when you couple that in with his strong offense, I don't have a major problem with him getting in. He's no Rick Middleton though, nosireebob.

 

[frisco]

I was born in 1985 and started watching hockey in '93. I'm not going to pretend I watched these two players or know all about their careers.

However, I am curious as to whether their inductions into the HHOF never seem to be mentioned among the weaker or more questionable ones. In recent years, people constantly malign the inductions of Housley, Andreychuk and Duff (and now Carbonneau and Lowe). Main board users sometimes are critical of the inductions of certain recent players: Kariya ("short career"), Sundin ("didn't win anything") or Modano ("got in because of Nationality") etc. Posters in the HOH section tend to cite "compilers" (Ciccarelli, Gartner etc), players who probably wouldn't have been inducted with less team success (Anderson, Gllies etc) or players who were very good but weren't quite elite NHL players (Federko, Nieuwendyk, Mullen etc) as weaker HOF inductees. But I pretty much never see any criticism of Barber's induction or Shutt's.

On paper, neither player's career looks special enough to be Hall-worthy.


To provide a simple overview:


Steve Shutt:


1976: 27th in League scoring (80 GP)

1977: Third in NHL scoring (60 goals) - 80 GP

1978: 12th in League scoring (80 GP)

1979: 24th in NHL scoring (72 GP) - 19th in PPG among players who played at least 80 games

1980: 19th in League scoring (77 GP)

1981: 43rd in NHL scoring (77 GP)


In a six season prime, he was a top ten scorer once, a top 20 scorer three times and a top 30 scorer five times.

He does have very good playoffs stats: 98 points in 99 games (won five Cups)

Bill Barber:


1974: 27th in League scoring (75 GP)

1975: 36th in NHL scoring (79 GP)

1976: Fourth in League scoring (50 goals) - 80 GP

1977: Outside the top 50 in scoring

1978: 26th in NHL scoring

1979: 20th in League scoring (79 GP)

1980: 43rd in NHL scoring (79 GP)

1981: 23rd in League scoring (80 GP)

1982: 25th in NHL scoring (80 GP)


In a nine season prime, he was a top ten scorer once, a top 20 scorer twice and a top 30 scorer six times.

He also has good playoff stats: 108 points in 129 games (won two Cups).



Superficially, these two players appear to me to be at a Joe Nieuwendyk or Glenn Anderson level at best in terms of Hall-worthiness. Neither one has super impressive longevity (like a Gartner) or an incredibly high peak (outside of a single season spike for each anyway).

How come no one mentions them when talking about whether recent inductees are "lowering the bar"?

Both were pretty weak picks. I think it is just a demographic HF Board thing that people rag on Andreychuk or whomever instead just because the average age of the Board probably doesn't remember Shutt/Barber and players of that era.

There are other factors. When Shutt/Barber retired there wasn't as many "qualified" HOFers just because the league was smaller and there wasn't a backlog as you'd see today. It is not something people talk about much but I think it is a pretty big deal. For example, a Jeremy Roenick who is barely even brought up anymore as a candidate, in my mind was a way better player than Shutt or Barber, but with the expanded NHL he's going up against a huge lot of candidates.

I've been an NHL follower since 1973 so I skew old on these Boards and that's where I'm coming from.

My Best-Carey

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Top secondary players on multiple championship teams generally always get into the HHOF. But yes, these are two guys who likely wouldn't sniff at the Hall if they had played for other teams.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Not defending either nomination all that fiercely, but, when they played, it seemed that the vast majority of the best forwards were centers - more than any other time in history. So, if you look at their dominance strictly as wingers, they look as good as many others who made it. Going by how dominant they were in the league as a whole, no, they don't look all that great. I frequently cite Shutt as one of the 25 NHL-era HHOFers I'd remove in favour of another 25. Barber was probably the 3rd best defensive winger of his generation, so when you couple that in with his strong offense, I don't have a major problem with him getting in. He's no Rick Middleton though, nosireebob.

3rd best defensive winger of his generation seems like a pretty big stretch for Barber, no?

My impression of him was good, not great, defensively - maybe approximately Alfreddsson level, but not Hossa level. But I could be wrong.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

they finished with basically the same number of goals and retired within a year of each other

when shutt retired, one year after barber, he was 20th all time in goals, barber was 21st. there were only ten 500 goal scorers

one way of looking at it is, well for their time, they had elite careers. 900 games was good and long for a guy who played mostly in the 70s too.

on the other hand, look at the guy right under them in career goals: gerry unger. so if they are just unger with cups, that doesn’t look great. but i think it was just as much that barber and shutt each had one huge memorable scoring year while unger was more, well, gartnery.

neither was a first year inductee but barber got in first, in 1990. by that time, shutt was 25th all time, barber 26th. that’s how fast it went with the 80s generation starting to totally push all but the very best 70s guys off the all time lists.

shutt gets in in 93. by now, shutt is 35th, barber 37th, with denis savard briefly between them. there are now eighteen 500 goal scorers, with dino and mario knocking on the door. by now everyone’s forgotten about unger and if shutt doesn’t get in before he falls any farther down the list, he probably will be consigned to the dustbin with the fellow “other guy on the famous line” who was just finishing his career immediately above them on the all time goals list: dave taylor, himself also the owner of one huge scoring year in a steady but not especially spectacular career (albeit with no cups).

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

62.	Rick Middleton	1974-88	448
63.	Daniel Alfredsson	1995-14	444
64.	Ilya Kovalchuk	2001-20	443
65.	Steve Larmer	1980-95	441
	Rick Vaive	1979-92	441
67.	Rick Tocchet	1984-02	440
68.	Gary Roberts	1986-09	438
69.	Pavel Bure*	1991-03	437
	Rick Nash	2002-18	437
71.	Eric Staal	2003-20	436
72.	Vincent Damphousse	1986-04	432
73.	Dave Taylor	1977-94	431
74.	Alex Kovalev	1992-13	430
75.	Bill Guerin	1991-10	429
Rank	Player	Years	G
76.	Yvan Cournoyer*	1963-79	428
77.	Brian Propp	1979-94	425
78.	Steve Shutt*	1972-85	424
79.	Steven Stamkos	2008-20	422
	Owen Nolan	1990-10	422
81.	Vincent Lecavalier	1998-16	421
	Stephane Richer	1984-02	421
	Steve Thomas	1984-04	421
84.	Bill Barber*	1972-84	420
	Joe Thornton	1997-20	420
86.	Jason Arnott	1993-12	417
87.	Evgeni Malkin	2006-20	416
	Tony Amonte	1991-07	416
89.	John MacLean	1983-02	413
	Garry Unger	1967-83	413

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

for HHOF in/out purposes this is a fairly interesting patch of the all time goals list

 

[Buffalowing1988]

Would you take either over Rick Martin?

 

[frisco]

Would you take either over Rick Martin?

Martin was a more dynamic player and peaked higher (better AS voting and top stats finishes) but basically was completely done at 29. Martin is 11th goals/game in NHL history. Shutt (47) and Barber (42) are lower down but didn't have really long careers, either, to drag down their per game numbers.

My Best-Carey

 

[Dissonance Jr]

There are other factors. When Shutt/Barber retired there wasn't as many "qualified" HOFers just because the league was smaller and there wasn't a backlog as you'd see today. It is not something people talk about much but I think it is a pretty big deal. For example, a Jeremy Roenick who is barely even brought up anymore as a candidate, in my mind was a way better player than Shutt or Barber, but with the expanded NHL he's going up against a huge lot of candidates.

Agree with this. In 1990, the year Barber got in, there were a total of six players nominated: Bill Barber, Guy Lapointe, Eric Nesterenko, Gilbert Perreault, Bob Pulford and Steve Shutt.

Perreault is an obvious inductee, but after that... sure, Barber might be the second best choice on that list. (I think Lapointe was a much better player but also get why voters waited on him for awhile.)

 

[wetcoast]

I was born in 1985 and started watching hockey in '93. I'm not going to pretend I watched these two players or know all about their careers.

However, I am curious as to whether their inductions into the HHOF never seem to be mentioned among the weaker or more questionable ones. In recent years, people constantly malign the inductions of Housley, Andreychuk and Duff (and now Carbonneau and Lowe). Main board users sometimes are critical of the inductions of certain recent players: Kariya ("short career"), Sundin ("didn't win anything") or Modano ("got in because of Nationality") etc. Posters in the HOH section tend to cite "compilers" (Ciccarelli, Gartner etc), players who probably wouldn't have been inducted with less team success (Anderson, Gllies etc) or players who were very good but weren't quite elite NHL players (Federko, Nieuwendyk, Mullen etc) as weaker HOF inductees. But I pretty much never see any criticism of Barber's induction or Shutt's.

On paper, neither player's career looks special enough to be Hall-worthy.


To provide a simple overview:


Steve Shutt:


1976: 27th in League scoring (80 GP)

1977: Third in NHL scoring (60 goals) - 80 GP

1978: 12th in League scoring (80 GP)

1979: 24th in NHL scoring (72 GP) - 19th in PPG among players who played at least 80 games

1980: 19th in League scoring (77 GP)

1981: 43rd in NHL scoring (77 GP)


In a six season prime, he was a top ten scorer once, a top 20 scorer three times and a top 30 scorer five times.

He does have very good playoffs stats: 98 points in 99 games (won five Cups)

Bill Barber:


1974: 27th in League scoring (75 GP)

1975: 36th in NHL scoring (79 GP)

1976: Fourth in League scoring (50 goals) - 80 GP

1977: Outside the top 50 in scoring

1978: 26th in NHL scoring

1979: 20th in League scoring (79 GP)

1980: 43rd in NHL scoring (79 GP)

1981: 23rd in League scoring (80 GP)

1982: 25th in NHL scoring (80 GP)


In a nine season prime, he was a top ten scorer once, a top 20 scorer twice and a top 30 scorer six times.

He also has good playoff stats: 108 points in 129 games (won two Cups).



Superficially, these two players appear to me to be at a Joe Nieuwendyk or Glenn Anderson level at best in terms of Hall-worthiness. Neither one has super impressive longevity (like a Gartner) or an incredibly high peak (outside of a single season spike for each anyway).

How come no one mentions them when talking about whether recent inductees are "lowering the bar"?

I mention them quite a bit as well as Clark Gillies.

And then Rick Middleton who played in the same era still needs to buy a ticket to get into the HHOF....WTF?

 

[wetcoast]

Martin was a more dynamic player and peaked higher (better AS voting and top stats finishes) but basically was completely done at 29. Martin is 11th goals/game in NHL history. Shutt (47)and Barber (42) are lower down but didn't have really long careers, either, to drag down their per game numbers.

My Best-Carey

But it's not like Shutt added alot to his resume after 29 either and he was also traded to the Kings like Martin was...guess the Kings didn't learn their lesson with Martin, miind you they only gave up futures for Shutt.

But there is little doubt that if Martin doesn't get that knee injury 8 Nov 1980 against the Capitals that he would be in the HHOF.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

random LWs

barber, 1973-'84

903 games
420 goals
883 points
AST 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 5
goals: 5th, 7th
points: 4th
best season: 50 goals, 112 points

shutt, 1973-'85

930 games
424 goals
817 points
AST 1, 2, 2, 3, 3
goals: 1, 3, 8, 10
points: 3rd
best season: 60 goals, 105 points

tonelli, 1979-'92

1,028 games
325 goals
836 points
AST 2, 2
goals, points: (crickets)
best season: 42 goals, 100 points

propp, 1980-'94

1,016 games
425 goals
1,004 points
AST 4, 4, 4
goals, points: (crickets)
best season: 43 goals, 97 points


i wonder whether barber and shutt were better offensive players than tonelli or propp, or if we're just talking about difference between playing your prime in the 70s and playing your prime in the 80s.

 

[Buffalowing1988]

But it's not like Shutt added alot to his resume after 29 either and he was also traded to the Kings like Martin was...guess the Kings didn't learn their lesson with Martin, miind you they only gave up futures for Shutt.

But there is little doubt that if Martin doesn't get that knee injury 8 Nov 1980 against the Capitals that he would be in the HHOF.

Yeah, looking back now, Martin was more than just a complementary piece to Perreault. He was very talented. Rene Robert was fine, but he was not on the same level as the other two members of the French Connection.

 

[GammaAway]

Regardin Shutt, he has the advantage of playing on an iconic line. For a lot of people in Quebec, ''Lafleur-Shutt-Lemaire'' is an unbreakable series of names to this day, and ''Lafleur and Lemaire should be in but Shutt out'' just does not compute.

 

[Voight]

Neither gets in if they play for say, Buffalo IMO. They were both helped by playing for popular teams.

Rick Martin should be in if they're in.

 

[JackSlater]

They're elite complements who were very likely don't get in without having played on certain teams. Top complementary players from dynasty or very memorable teams tend to get into the HHOF though so they aren't outliers or anything. Credit to them for successfully contributing to winning teams but neither was the kind of player you'd try to build a successful team around.

 

[frisco]

62.	Rick Middleton	1974-88	448
63.	Daniel Alfredsson	1995-14	444
64.	Ilya Kovalchuk	2001-20	443
65.	Steve Larmer	1980-95	441
	Rick Vaive	1979-92	441
67.	Rick Tocchet	1984-02	440
68.	Gary Roberts	1986-09	438
69.	Pavel Bure*	1991-03	437
	Rick Nash	2002-18	437
71.	Eric Staal	2003-20	436
72.	Vincent Damphousse	1986-04	432
73.	Dave Taylor	1977-94	431
74.	Alex Kovalev	1992-13	430
75.	Bill Guerin	1991-10	429
Rank	Player	Years	G
76.	Yvan Cournoyer*	1963-79	428
77.	Brian Propp	1979-94	425
78.	Steve Shutt*	1972-85	424
79.	Steven Stamkos	2008-20	422
	Owen Nolan	1990-10	422
81.	Vincent Lecavalier	1998-16	421
	Stephane Richer	1984-02	421
	Steve Thomas	1984-04	421
84.	Bill Barber*	1972-84	420
	Joe Thornton	1997-20	420
86.	Jason Arnott	1993-12	417
87.	Evgeni Malkin	2006-20	416
	Tony Amonte	1991-07	416
89.	John MacLean	1983-02	413
	Garry Unger	1967-83	413

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

for HHOF in/out purposes this is a fairly interesting patch of the all time goals list

If you adjust for era via hockey-reference Shutt drops to #145 and Barber #152. Also, Middleton is #139, Propp #158 and Unger #130. These guys mostly played in very high scoring environments.

My Best-Carey

 

[Voight]

They're elite complements who were very likely don't get in without having played on certain teams. Top complementary players from dynasty or very memorable teams tend to get into the HHOF though so they aren't outliers or anything. Credit to them for successfully contributing to winning teams but neither was the kind of player you'd try to build a successful team around.

Both are better than Gilles, but all 3 as well as Glenn Anderson got in because of that exact reason.

 

[Kyle McMahon]

With regards to Barber, it would be very difficult to justify his omission based on historical precedent.

You'd be leaving the Flyers, winners of back to back Cups with three straight finals appearances, with just Clarke and Parent as their HOF representatives. It's tough not to give the nod to the #3 guy in that situation. 1930s Detroit got Herbie Lewis inducted right before Barber. 1939-41 Boston got Bauer and Dumart both in right after. 1930s Montreal got a third skater (D Sylvio Mantha), though that was back in 1960.

Being the #3 guy (at least #3 in terms of how accomplished his career was, perhaps MacLeish and/or Leach were more important specifically to the 74-76 teams) is what sets Barber apart from Gillies and Anderson, at least in terms of how the HOF tends to operate.

Barber was also a three-time all star. That in itself is probably a 95% certainty to get you in. Of course we have the benefit of historical perspective now and can see that competition at his position was going through a historically weak period, but this may not have been so clear in 1990. Same applies to Steve Shutt.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

If you adjust for era via hockey-reference Shutt drops to #145 and Barber #152. Also, Middleton is #139, Propp #158 and Unger #130. These guys mostly played in very high scoring environments.

My Best-Carey

i think the corollary to adjusting for high scoring eras is also adjusting for long career eras.

i don't know that it isn't also reasonable to say the ~900 game careers of barber/shutt are roughly equivalent to the ~1,000 game careers of nifty/propp/larmer, and the 1,100-1,200 game careers of, say, brian bellows or john maclean or tocchet or scott young or tony amonte.

 

[seventieslord]

With regards to Barber, it would be very difficult to justify his omission based on historical precedent.

You'd be leaving the Flyers, winners of back to back Cups with three straight finals appearances, with just Clarke and Parent as their HOF representatives. It's tough not to give the nod to the #3 guy in that situation. 1930s Detroit got Herbie Lewis inducted right before Barber. 1939-41 Boston got Bauer and Dumart both in right after. 1930s Montreal got a third skater (D Sylvio Mantha), though that was back in 1960.

Being the #3 guy (at least #3 in terms of how accomplished his career was, perhaps MacLeish and/or Leach were more important specifically to the 74-76 teams) is what sets Barber apart from Gillies and Anderson, at least in terms of how the HOF tends to operate.

Barber was also a three-time all star. That in itself is probably a 95% certainty to get you in. Of course we have the benefit of historical perspective now and can see that competition at his position was going through a historically weak period, but this may not have been so clear in 1990. Same applies to Steve Shutt.

Not that I disagree with this all that much, but the narrative about the Flyers at the time was that they were a well-coached team with just two special players (Clarke and Parent).

 

[MS]

They're both weak inductions but it has to be said that lumping them together is unfair to Barber, who was a far better player than Shutt.

Barber was a vastly superior two-way player and penalty killer, provided more jam and physical play, and was less reliant on elite linemates for his production. He twice led good Philly teams in scoring by a substantial margin, something Shutt never came anywhere near doing. Barber was a guy who drove offense by himself, Shutt was a guy who finished for talented linemates.

Shutt's career also ended organically after a few ineffective seasons, while Barber was still a top two-way winger when his career was ended by a knee injury in 1984. Without that injury, he probably gets to 1000 points and has a good shot at 500 goals.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

With regards to Barber, it would be very difficult to justify his omission based on historical precedent.

You'd be leaving the Flyers, winners of back to back Cups with three straight finals appearances, with just Clarke and Parent as their HOF representatives.

meanwhile, housley, andreychuk, lafontaine, hawerchuk, [almo,] [turgeon,] (fuhr,) (hasek,) ([barrasso])