Double OT: Lindros belongs in the Hall of Fame
Eric Lindros ranks 17th in all-time points per game at 1.14.
Mike Brophy
2007-11-07 14:49:23
With Eric Lindros on the verge of announcing his retirement, the question on the tip of everybody’s lips is: Is The Big E a Hall-of-Famer?
In a word, yes.
There is no question his career, much shorter than expected and riddled with injuries, did not amount to what many anticipated when he burst on the scene nearly 20 years ago as a powerful teenager bubbling over with potential. And we can only sit back and wonder how dominant he would have been had he remained healthy and enjoyed a long NHL career.
But that does not change the fact that, for a few years at least, Eric Lindros was one of the best players in the world. And if Vladislav Tretiak can get into the Hall of Fame based on what he did playing outside the NHL, then surely Lindros can get in for what he did accomplish in the best hockey league in the world.
With 865 points in 760 career games, Lindros retires ranked 17th in all-time points per game at 1.14. When you consider he managed just 133 points in his final four injury-plagued years with the Rangers, Maple Leafs and Stars, his ranking could have been higher had he elected to not continue playing.
All of the retired players ranked ahead of him, with the exception of Kent Nilsson and Steve Yzerman, are in the Hall of Fame. Yzerman will surely be elected to the Hall the first year he is eligible.
Of those still active, Jaromir Jagr, Peter Forsberg and Joe Sakic are all sure-fire Hall of Famers.
Lindros was a highly political figure, refusing first to play for the OHL’s Sault Ste. Marie Greyhounds and then the Quebec Nordiques, but if that is what some will use to keep him out of the Hall, then their motivation is skewed. Ted Lindsay, who battled for years to help form the NHL Players’ Association, was also a very political figure and he’s in the Hall. Bobby Hull once sat out a WHA game in protest of violence in the game and he’s in.
I have listened to the criticism Lindros has faced over the years – that he was too influenced by meddling parents and that he never won the Stanley Cup – but when I think of Lindros as a player, I think of a powerful game-breaker who was unquestionably one of the most dominant individuals to ever skate in the NHL. I think of a bodychecker who caused opponents to toss and turn all night before they had to play against him…of his lightning-quick release on the best snap shot the game has ever seen…of how he played for Team Canada in the 1991 Canada Cup as a teenager…of his 1994-95 MVP season when he scored 29 goals and 70 points in 46 games.
It was injuries, and nothing more, that hampered what could have been a storybook career. When he was healthy, Lindros was one of the best to ever play hockey. That, and that alone, should be the determining factor when it comes time to consider him for the honor of being inducted into the Hall of Fame. I’m not about to start naming names, but suffice it to say there have been players inducted into the Hall with lesser credentials.
I don’t have a vote because I am not on the Hall of Fame selection committee. But if I did, I would not only vote yes, I would debate to the end of the earth with anybody who opposed his inclusion.
It is an argument I do not believe I could lose.
Mike Brophy's Double OT appears regularly on The Hockey News.com.
One of THN’s senior writers, Mike Brophy gives you insight and opinion on the world of hockey like no one else. Subscribe to The Hockey News to get Mike's expertise delivered to you every issue.
boston paul (Posted 2008-01-17 00:21:02)
yea and lets add brother bret to that list too shmukz. hes done nothing nothing nothing
Allan Bassett (Posted 2007-12-10 07:23:23)
To Mike Brophy, Vladislav Tretiak did more for the game of hockey then Eric Lindros. The fact that he won only one Art Ross in a half season with no 50 goal year is a disapointment. Considering all the players he's played with he couldn't even be carried. The Hockey Hall of fame is supposed to be filled with players that had a career, as well as putting Eric Lindros in a class like Mark Messier, or any of the Hall of famers at least in the past 5 years is an insult. Lindros should go to the Hall of fame if there's ever a season where they is nobody with a 50 goal season, 100 point season, a Stanley cup or any other award, then Lindros can go.
Jon Kopczyk (Posted 2007-11-16 12:53:01)
Paul H, you're either from Sweden or Colorado to put Forsberg above both Yzerman and Sakic. There's a reason why the overall numbers may be different, both of those players have played more than twice as many games as Forsberg, and in the twilight of careers the number decline.
I can't believe you even brougth +/- into the conversation, it's nearly a garbage stat in my opinion. I'll take Yzerman or Sakic any day of the week over Forsberg. You have to at least suit up to skate.
Regardless of the stats how can you put Forsberg in the hall with his NHL stats? I just don't see it.
Alex Begin (Posted 2007-11-15 15:43:52)
I think he doesn't belong. It's not only a matter of numbers, ratios, etc. When I think of the HHOF, I think of inspirations, models, examples, etc. I don't feel these when I think of Lindros. I see them when i think of Neely for instance
Brian Curtis (Posted 2007-11-14 12:17:40)
Geez Broph! I'm strting to disagree with you as often as I do that nutbar Ken Campbell! Lindros in The Hall? For what.. for single-handedly ruining the NHL ? He has been THE WORST THING TO EVER HAPPEN TO PROFFESSIONAL HOCKEY! The ONLY team he ever helped accomplish anything was the Avalanche! I HATE Eric Lindros, at least, I hate what he did to hockey. He's a suck who never grew up AND besides Forsberg, has been the MOST OVER-RATED PLAYER EVER! If you honestly believe he belongs in a "Shrine to hockey", you must be as dizzy as he is! I think it's time the hockey news got some replacements for you, Proteau and Campbell... all of your views run contrary to those of most hockey fans. If you three had your way, we'd have bigger nets, no hitting or (Gasp!) fighting, every player would wear a full-face cage, the scores would be 11-9, and more over-rated sucks like Forsberg and Lindros would be in the Hockey Hall of Fame...but NEVER Paul Henderson! Who would you like to see next? Mike Ribiero? Kovalev? Perhaps you three should create a new Hall for momma's boys, whiners, actors and players made of glass! By the way... I'm also not a fan of the hockey "newspaper" turning into a "magazine" (with newsprint pages...nice cheap look!). I am seeking an alternative ... wish they'd bring back "The Hockey Digest"...
Paul (Posted 2007-11-13 10:55:05)
I think people also need to remember what Lindros did for the Flyers. After suffering numerous poor season, just his name increased ticket sales. From reading these comments it's clear the only thing people remember of Big E is his parents and his fued w/Clarke.
But it was Lindros who turned this Flyers organization into a powerhouse again. Especially after the addition of LeClair and Rendberg. And this argument of he's never won a cup is empty. How many players/coaches are in the HHOF who have never won a cup? I'm sure Big E wouldn't be the first.
Like it or not Eric Lindros was a force, and to show how much, just recall that the playoff game with the Devils (yeah the same one as the now infamous Scott Stevens hit) if memory serves me correctly, Lindros scored the only Flyers goal.
That whole team was different when he was in the line up, and that is what makes a player worth of the HOF.
Tim Hoinkis (Posted 2007-11-12 15:39:14)
Yea... Let's put the biggest disappointment of all time in the Hall of Fame... A great junior career, because he was a man "playing amongst boys" and a few good years in Philly. He should be in the Hall of Shame because of his latter years in Philly, and his willingness to allow his family to destroy his potential and career. How many times do you need to get hit with your head down before you learn from it...?
Chuck H. (Posted 2007-11-12 15:05:54)
Hey Brophy,
If Lindros gets in does that mean his parents get in the Hall too. They did just as much for/to his career than anyone. Being a Flyers fan I do not think he should be in the HOF. Ya he had good stats for the length of the career he had but there are others out there that deserve it more then he does. To talk about him going in is NUTS!
J. Seymour (Posted 2007-11-11 23:48:18)
Hey Brophy.....NO WAY to Lindros getting into the HOF!!! Just because there are other "lesser" players that are in the HOF doesn't mean the HOF should continue witht heir errors. I agree that there are some players that shouldn't be in there (Gillies anyone?) but that just means the HOF shouldn't have voted THEM in either.......
Gunther (Posted 2007-11-11 22:38:21)
If you base his inclusion in the Hall by it's members, then he should be inducted. He is easily more talented than many Hall members and judging by HOF Cam Neely, he has more than enough in the stats department as well.
Peter Andersson (Posted 2007-11-10 18:51:30)
"That Legion of Doom line was scary good and let's face it it wasn't because of Renberg"
Of course it was because of Renberg :)
Marc power (Posted 2007-11-09 10:15:39)
No way! He started his career by not wearing the Nordiques jersey on DRAFT day! I can't see him in the HOF
Frank Grimes (Posted 2007-11-09 09:01:06)
Aha Brophy! Everyone is laughing at you again. Lindros in the Hall of Fame, nice argument..stupid! Thank god we're all smart enough to know better. I knew THN was a rag with no credibility but you etched it in stone and bronzed it. They're still laughing at you Brophy.
Big D (Posted 2007-11-08 23:33:28)
Lindros is a cheap shot artist and a whiner. The only team he ever helped win is the Avalanche.
Hall of shame definately.
mc (Posted 2007-11-08 20:36:21)
Eric Lindros is singlehandedly the most overrated and overhyped player ever in the league. He never made an impact on the league,he never carried his team to the stanley cup,never lead a single statistical catergory in hockey except maybe concussions throughout his career but yet becuase he was hyped the next one the media still feels this clown deservers to get in.If the voting committee votes him in, then they just lowered the standards for everbody else to get in the hall!!!!!!
John Ramacca (Posted 2007-11-08 19:15:50)
Lindros was the most dominant player in the NHL when he was healthy AND happy, but that was not too often, and he did not win championships. Fragile health, bad attitude (ask Quebec fans), and a lack of Championships should be enough to keep Lindros out of the hall. Kent Nilsson should be in the hall and if any selection commitee selects Lindros over Nilsson than we need a new selection commitee.
James Ingram (Posted 2007-11-08 18:28:52)
Hall of Famers should not be noted on what they "could have done". By that way of thinking there are hundreds of players that "could have done" so much more that they did. Its stupidity like this that caused me to cancel my subscription to this rag.
I grew up a Flyers fan and know what the gave up for this guy. It doesnt matter where in the NHL he landed, he didnt perform. Plain and simple. The NHL will be a much better place without Eric " Eggshell " Lindros.
Derek H (Posted 2007-11-08 17:38:27)
I'm sad for the Hall of Fame and what it means to be inducted if Lindros gets in. I cannot believe this is even a topic of discussion.
Paul H (Posted 2007-11-08 15:20:08)
This article wasn't supposed to be about Forsberg, but I can't see how anybody could possibly questions whether Forsberg belongs in the Hall of Fame? He's got a Calder, a Hart, an Art Ross, has led the league in +/-, has 2 World Cups, 2 Olympic Golds (including the medal winning goal in the first and the medal winning assist in the second). Not to mention, he has better +/- playoff numbers and better points per game playoff numbers than Jagr, Sakic, Yzerman and Lindros (according to the TSN stats). He also has better +/- and points per regular season game numbers than Sakic, Yzerman, and Lindros. The numbers don't lie: Forsberg is better when the chips are down than Jagr, Sakic, Yzerman, and Lindros.
Unless you believe Gretzky is the only guy who belongs in the Hall of Fame, you can't make a credible argument against Forsberg's inclusion.
Jon Kopczyk (Posted 2007-11-08 14:37:48)
C Cook,
I wasn't flaming you. My response was to Brophy's quote below:
"Of those still active, Jaromir Jagr, Peter Forsberg and Joe Sakic are all sure-fire Hall of Famers."
Jagr and Sakic for sure, but no way on Forsberg in my opinion.
Sorry for the confusion.
C.Cook (Posted 2007-11-08 14:05:28)
Jon K - I didn't mean Forsberg was in. I was finding a comparable to Eric. Forsberg accomplished sooo much more in a career that parallels to Lindros' even for how they were traded for each other.
Jon Kopczyk (Posted 2007-11-08 13:56:29)
How do you figure Forsberg is a "surefire" hall of famer?
He doesn't even have 250 goals, not even 700 games played.
Sure he was a top player when healthy, but the numbers just aren't there in my opinion. I think his legend grows the longer he sits out.
I'm not saying this because I'm a Wings fan, I can appreciate talent no matter where they play. But I just don't think he did enought to warrant the Hall.
C.Cook (Posted 2007-11-08 13:47:01)
He played 53 playoff games in a 760 game career. 10 playoff games over his last last 8 seasons. Compare that to Forsberg who played in 144 playoff games with 2 cups. Injuries or not this guy won one conference final. You're putting him in the hall for what amounts to 3 great seasons. Sad.
SV (Posted 2007-11-08 13:05:23)
Lindros in the Hall of Fame? First off wining the Stanley Cup should not be a criteria for the Hall. Wining the cup is a team game and not an individual thing. The hall is an individual honor and thus it should treated as such.
Leave aside the off ice stuff such as demanding a trade, asking another player to leave etc...(though I can't seem to remember this). What was Lindros in his prime like? There were very players in the mid 90's who you would trade for Lindros and they were all Hall of Fame'ers. So he passes that test.
Was Lindros someone who as fan scared you when he played against your team. You damn right he was. That Legion of Doom line was scary good and let's face it it wasn't because of Renberg.
Finally, Lindros was even more afflicted by the Mario rules in the sense that referees thought he was big, so all hacking and grabbing was alright. Look at the players who fought through all that physical abuse you will a litany of players who are injury plagued. Right away Forsberg comes up (and no I don't think Lindros is as good as Forsberg) but does he have the cup wins without Roy? No, and that's the reason Lindros doesn't have a cup. It's just that simple. Remember how dominant Dallas and Colorado were in the late 90's and early 2000's and now that they don't have HOF goalies they loose in the first round. Alright I am getting side-tracked.
Cam Neely took a while to get to the Hall, let's not make that mistake with Lindros.
tom monteath (Posted 2007-11-08 11:31:08)
Lindros' career will perhaps be remembered for it's unfulfilled potential. In terms of skill, and his numbers and success from his early years (92-97), he was a class-act. His goals-per-game average for his first 200 games is, i think, 3rd all-time. He was the MVP (and tied for the league scoring lead) in '95, captain of the flyers (and Team Canada in '97), and led Philadelphia to the Final. His name remains synonymous with skill in hockey, despite the injuries that handicapped him throughout most of his career. In terms of his character, the controversy in which he was embroiled as a teenager, by refusing to join the Nordiques, was obviously orchestrated by his father. His later feuds and clashes with management really aren't anything to hold against him - he is not alone: Hasek, among others, had similar disputes. Besides, they made good copy.
Lindros certainly deserves to be in the Hall of Fame. I think the naysayers are perhaps judging him by what he didn't achieve (and hold a grudge that he didn't ultimately live up to the moniker 'The Next One'), rather than what he did. My only caveat would be that he should not be treated as a priority, there are many others who deserve a place as much, and plenty who deserve it more. Perhaps a decade down the line, when there is a shortage of candidates for induction, (there are bound to be a few years like this, what with the relative dearth of skilled players who entered 96-04), Lindros should get the call. Perhaps Kent Nilsson could join him.
Simon M. (Posted 2007-11-08 10:33:00)
Lindros did so much for the game at a time when the owners had the players by the balls. Why do you think we had a lockout? The reason was the players were getting the short end of the stick, and Lindros was the only player willing to step up. Call it no class, or maybe you read his from teammates book. Kieth Jones I believe it was. He worked hard and he played hard.
juice (Posted 2007-11-08 09:25:54)
not the best player. too many if ands and buts in this article. lame. Lindros had potential but is a hurt little girl. good riddance.
Peter Kohut (Posted 2007-11-08 02:13:37)
Sorry. To me, it takes more than numbers to get into that wonderful building on Yonge St. It's about your ability as a player, what you brought to the game, and yes....class. This is a sport steeped in tradition....a sport that prides itself on being a class act event. Lindros has, or HAD, absolutely NO CLASS. From his refusal to play in Sault Ste. Marie to his demanding to be traded to the Leafs when he was in Philly (good thing Bobby Clarke didn't give in to that), this man has shown no class what so ever. It is my sincere hope that the Hall of Fame maintains it's current integrity, and keeps Baby Lindros OUT. This should be a NO BRAINER.
Derek H (Posted 2007-11-08 01:27:03)
WHAT???? Are you serious? He wasn't even the top center on the Flyers teams he was on (Rod Brind'amour was). Very ordinary player with some flashes here and there. Awful captain.
This article, hopefully, is the last overhyped moment of an overhyped career. It seems he can't get away from being overhyped, even in retirement.
Brent Caverley (Posted 2007-11-07 22:09:29)
I remember when Lindros came into the league and telling a buddy of mine who was a huge Flyers fan that as long as they have this guy on their team they'll never win a cup and for that matter neither will Lindros.
He came into the league under bad karma and that's exactly how he left.
You can't let a 17 year old kid dictate what he wants to do.
If you don't want to play hockey with the team that drafts you, go shovel ditches for a living. If you're as good as you think you are, you'll end up where you want to go eventually. As far as his play, I can recall watching games where you didn't even hear Lindros' name during the play.
He may have been an impact player but that was only when he decided to join the game. If he had to carry the whole load for the Flyers while he was there, well then that's what you get when you point out that the world revolves around you. If you want to throw out stats that's fine but then you need to decide what the hall of fame is all about and right now that's anybody's guess. Based on the past criteria Lindros should get in but that doesn't mean he deserves to.
Chuck Jeffrey (Posted 2007-11-07 18:57:02)
Great article. Iam now convinced that EL does belong in the Hall. I have certainly loved to watch him play through the years.
Tom Murphy (Posted 2007-11-07 17:51:42)
Ask his teammates (ie Rod 'it's him or me' Brind'amour) what they think of Eric Lindros. I can't help but think negatively of him and his selfish antics
Peter Andersson (Posted 2007-11-07 17:12:20)
What? Kent Nilsson, not in the HOF? That's a shame...
JOhn Wright (Posted 2007-11-07 16:58:24)
I don't believe he is a Hall of Famer. He made no significant contribution to the sport, (Tretiak's is undeniable) not much of a leader, not much of a team player, not the most selfish, not the least, although it appeared to me that Eric was the most important thing for Eric. Perhaps this can be said about a lot of athletes but he must stand beside all those other inductees. Does he compliment them or does he lower the standards of the Hall? One might argue that there are too many people in that Shrine. Maybe some people think he's a star, he does not stack up for me.
Arnie B (Posted 2007-11-07 16:54:45)
Is it the 'Hall of Really Good Players'..or the Hall of Fame ???
No championships, no scoring titles.....play with stats all you want...go looking for his name on the Cup (my #1 criteria) and you'll see Glenn Anderson's name SIX TIMES AND HE'S NOT IN THE HALL OF FAME???
And Lindros should be?? Oh please...
And for that matter...Cam Neely in the Hall?? Because he was a big guy that played hard and won nothing??? But he had his career cut short so we should all feel sorry for him???
Sorry..it's the HOCKEY HALL OF FAME, not the Hall of Really Good guys...Lindros in the Hall is a joke.
Chris Penney (Posted 2007-11-07 16:09:14)
Brophy, buddy. I just lost every ounce of respect I had for you. The only way the words "Lindros" and "Hall of Fame" should be used together is if it is in the sentence "Eric Lindros doesn't belong in the Hall of Fame." Stop with the numbers B.S and the comparisons to other Hall of Famers. Yes Eric Lindros was a star player for a few years, but not enough to be considered a Hall of Famer. I never felt that his play alone consistently elevated his team to another level like Yzerman, Gretzky or Lemieux. Yes his career was short because of injury, but don't go comparing him to a great like Cam Neely. Cam Neely played every game like a man on a mission every night. I saw nights where even in his prime Lindros was a no show. Don't go sullying the name and reputations of great Hall of Famers by comparing them to Eric Lindros. It just isn't right.
Mike Cass (Posted 2007-11-07 16:05:59)
As a 25+ year Flyer Fan, I can tell you there are many in Philly who know the real deal of the Flyers-Lindros saga. Eric questioned the medical staff and for that he was made out to be the black sheep of the family. Posters, images, all likeness of the man were abruptly taken away and we were to treat him as the Evil empire. The fact was it was the Flyer propaganda machine which overrode the whole situation and most in Flyerland could not get over it and realize that the years he gave us were some of the best we ever had. We were a puck moving defensemen and goalie away from winning the Cup with Eric as the primary reason. I fully agree he is HOF worthy as he scored more points in the games he played then 95%+ of the players who ever played this game and he did it in an era when guys where playing in a phone booth with all of the hooking, holding, trapping (thanks Devils!). I would love to have seen him play in today's freeflowing game!
Lana K. (Posted 2007-11-07 15:59:33)
Allan, we are talking about "class" & here you are classifying Gretzky as having it and Lindros as not having any!?? 1) do you know them personally? 2) were you ever behind closed doors during what went on in the NHL dressing rooms or offices?
Come on.. you aren't showing much class yourself with these type of statements. I am not here to sart an online "war of words" with you, but let's think about these players as people first and foremost. If someone said these kind of things about you and or your family, friends, etc. you would not appreciate it I am sure.
I have my own "views" about Gretzky, but I will chose to keep those offline, and show some class
Alan Bass (Posted 2007-11-07 15:55:39)
No way!! If Lindros' stats can put him in the HOF, then his lack of class sure as heck keeps him out of it. He embarrassed the Philadelphia Flyers' organization, and I will never acknowledge Lindros as a great player, no matter how many points he gets. Gretzky at least had class, and did not call out Glen Sather when he was traded, or yelled at the Rangers' GM for not winning a cup with him. Lindros in the Hall? NO WAY!
Lana Kindrachuk (Posted 2007-11-07 15:55:13)
What a well written article! nice to see a well-versed writer who is not belittling someone else in order to make themselves feel bigger. All these years of Eric Lindros getting dumped on for no reason, and finally an excellent article in which I whole-heartedly agree with! well done Mr. Brophy!
Advertisement
Which team will win the Atlantic Division?
"Our give-a-crap level was like at zero."
- Atlanta head coach John Anderson on Sunday's 4-1 loss to division rival Tampa Bay.
Our Partners
The Hockey News Corporation. All Rights Reserved © 2008 Transcontinental
Standards: XHTML 1.0 STRICT + CSS 2. V 1.5 17.09.2008
