Updated throughout the day with quick takes from staff.
Until now, the hockey career of Eric Lindros has been defined by two things: his laundry list of head injuries and his problems with the Philadelphia Flyers organization. Whether that's fair or not is certainly a debatable discussion, but one thing is for sure: neither of those things have anything to do with the dominance he showed on NHL rinks in the 1990s.
Still, when the Hall of Fame induction committee meets today to determine which members of this years class will be inducted into the Hall, these things will no doubt be part of the discussion. Of the 18 member committee, 14 of them need to vote yes for a player to be inducted.
For Lindros, certainly the most polarizing player in Flyers history, this doesn't bode well. Then again, if number 88 could convince Flyers fans to love him after all the nonsense that surrounded his departure from town, and if he could convince former Philly GM Bob Clarke, shouldn't he be able to convince anybody?
Take the jump, finish reading, then vote in the poll.
Here's a segment Clarke did on TSN back in 2007 on this very subject:
Despite Eric's parents turning their sons' career and Clarke's life into an absolute circus for several years, Clarke still believes that the guy is a Hall of Fame hockey player. While Clarke isn't the general manager anymore, he's still in the organization, and on the whole, the organization has forgiven Lindros.
This video from the beginning of the 2008-09 season shows that the feelings are mutual. It was played on the vdeo board before the Flyers' final game at the Spectrum.
If the people involved in the mess can put these issues aside, why shouldn't everybody else? Why shouldn't a committee of 18 people be able to look past the bull and vote based on a player's accolades?
Because those accolades are very impressive. 760 career NHL games, 865 career points. That's almost 1.14 points per game across a 13 year career. The number severely fell off the map in the latter years of his career due to injury, and longevity is certainly a concern of some voters, but if you consider the eight seasons he played in Philadelphia, he was one of the most dominant players in the league.
So, what do you think? Should Eric Lindros be inducted into the Hockey Hall of Fame?
14 comments
Comments
Hell yes.
The Daily Forehand -- SB Nation's Tennis Destination.
Broad Street Hockey.
by Ben Rothenberg on Jun 22, 2010 12:06 PM EDT reply actions
Unfortunately, no.
Man-crushin' on Boucher since 1999
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on Jun 22, 2010 12:33 PM EDT reply actions
There are just too many more deserving guys right now to consider Lindros (think Oates, Andreychuk, etc.). I’m not saying he won’t get in eventually, but the timing isn’t right.
by Alex Reed on Jun 22, 2010 1:24 PM EDT reply actions
Better numbers than Cam Neely
Even with the injuries which degraded his late career. Put him in.
by aravir on Jun 22, 2010 1:50 PM EDT reply actions
that's 1.14 points per game, not 1.4 points per game
I’m on the fence over whether he belongs
Preparing my psyche for the coming Capocalypse
Confusion will be my epitaph.
by krome on Jun 22, 2010 3:09 PM EDT reply actions
Thanks, silly typo.
Visit the BSH Store :: Get us on Twitter :: facebook, too!
Broad Street Hockey - SBN's Philadelphia Flyers blog. 2010 Eastern Conference Champions.
by Travis Hughes on Jun 23, 2010 12:16 AM EDT up reply actions
Nope.
If numbers were all that mattered, sure. Him, Bure, Neely, Mogilny… But there’s more to it than that. He was a dominating player for a while, and had some very good skills, but he didn’t have the smarts.
He never developed past what he was in juniors, and classically he never learned how to take a hit. Without even going into the off ice stuff, he was never a leader in any way except for scoring. Maybe the fault for that was in management or in the expectations of the fans, but there was nothing else there.
Compare that to Neely, who was a demon for his teammates every time he touched the ice, even after his freak injury that eventually forced his retirement; or Andreychuk, who taught the Lightning how to win.
Lindros was a very skilled player… and nothing else. His numbers might warrant consideration, but there’s little more to add to tip the scales in his favour.
by Thursday on Jun 22, 2010 8:04 PM EDT reply actions
Disagree strongly sir.
You’d keep Lindros out because he “didn’t have the smarts”? Or because he couldn’t take a hit? That’s beyond ridiculous.
Lindros lived and died by the sword. You’d have a hard time finding any player in NHL history who hit as hard and vicious as he did. And he did that while being a top-flight point getter too. The problem is, other players ran him without caution because he was doing the same to them.
Maybe he needed to skate with his head up more often, but the real problem was that guys like Stevens and just about any physical defenseman, were looking to take Lindros’ head off with a huge hit because he was doing it to them for years. Gretzky, Crosby, Lemiuex…they never had to deal with that because they didn’t dish it out like Lindros did.
And to say that Lindros didn’t bring anything besides some scoring is unbelievably ignorant. Did you watch hockey in the 1990’s? I’ve already mentioned he was one of the best hitters in league history. He was always one of the top faceoff men in the league. He was a solid defensive centerman. Oh yeah, and he fought all the time and almost always won.
Maybe he never had that Messier blood in his genes, but Lindros did EVERYTHING on the ice and always stood up for his teammates. This is all evidenced by the fact that he is still incredibly well respected by him teammates and other players.
Anyway, Lindros is a Hall of Famer. Along with Bobby Orr, he’s the most complete NHL player we’ve ever seen. A short career and a resume without a Cup are blights on his record, but that doesn’t take away from the fact that he was a 6’4" 240 pound wrecking ball who skated like a smaller player and had small guy hands.
People forget just how dominant he was before his concussions. His point-per-game average was in the top five all time, that’s just insane when you factor in his physicality and role on the ice as a centerman.
To compare, Ovechkin has just over 269 goals, just over 529 points, and is +64 in 396 games played through five seasons.
Through five seasons, Lindros posted 193 goals, 436 points, and was +128 in only 297 games.
In essence, Lindros was like a playmaking version of Ovechkin, except he played center and hit a lot more and a lot harder and fought all the time.
Don’t tell me that’s not Hall of Fame worthy.
by Eric Murtaugh on Jul 12, 2010 6:00 PM EDT up reply actions
Lindros NOT
Has everyone forgot when this guy came into the league??? Who was he to play for? The Quebec Nordiques . Did he play for them? NO. As I recall he did not want to. Say what? Who do you think you are. Didn’t Clarke make a big trade for him. Sorry but that attitude to me is not Hall Of Fame worthy
by NCHarleyHardtail on Jun 22, 2010 8:34 PM EDT reply actions
what does any of that have to do with him playing the game
by steve v on Jun 23, 2010 11:18 AM EDT up reply actions
This question boils down to.. what is the criteria for voting someone in? Is it what they did on the ice, or on and off. Can anyone tell me what Hank Aaron did other than hit home runs On ice Lindros dominated, I hate him but he deserves to be in because of his on ice play.
by max creek on Jun 23, 2010 8:33 AM EDT reply actions
Lindros before he signed
If your actions BEFORE you sign a contract are reasons to keep you out of the hall, please recall that Mario Lemieux refused to put on the Penguins jersey and demanded a trade. The difference between he and Lindros at 19 years old? Lemieux wasn’t granted the trade. Lemieux refused to stand up and put on the pens jersey because of their tanking to get him and their history (and apparently, future…) of bankruptcy (1975). That’s a ridiculous argument, He was not in the NHL yet when he wouldn’t play. If he had signed the contract you’d have a point, but he was an 18 year old kid under his parents’ influence and had yet to join the NHL. You can’t keep a guy out for being a kid.
by Pardini36 on Jun 23, 2010 2:18 PM EDT reply actions
Wrong.
That’s utter B.S. about Lemieux’s reasons for not putting on the jersey and he never demanded a trade. He didn’t put the jersey on because his agent told him not to do it. They weren’t happy with contract negotiations to that point. It had nothing to do with the Penguins sucking at the time (I love how when the Penguins suck and get good draft picks they tanked to do it but when teams like, oh, let’s say, the Flyers suck, miss the playoffs and get good draft picks they just didn’t do well that year). Lemieux wanted to get paid.
That said, I agree that the draft stuff shouldn’t be held against Lindros, but you don’t need to make crap up about Lemieux to make that argument.
by badvibesdude on Jul 14, 2010 2:10 PM EDT up reply actions
Big game credentials?
Playoff performance is always big in hockey and Lindros is lacking there. Plus, he was a huge failure as captain of Canada in the 1998 Olympics although he did get a gold medal in 2002 as more of a bit player on the team…
Follow Bleeding Green Nation on Twitter & Facebook
by Jason Brewer on Jun 23, 2010 6:26 PM EDT reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed