Freddie P's Blog

June 18, 2008 @ 09:45

I’m glad I’m not among those who decide who makes it into the Hockey Hall of Fame, because if I was, I’d be part of a group of jerk offs.

This is so typical of today’s politically correct society – even goddamn sportswriters have bought into this bullshit.

Tell me how Igor Larionov could be elected to the Hall, while Dougie Gilmour could be over-looked.

I can’t see it, and I’ll start with the most basic argument. If you were starting a hockey team from scratch, and you had a choice of Doug Gilmour in his prime or Igor Larionov in his prime, who would you choose?

No brainer.

Larionov played the same position as Gilmour, and he joined the league in 1989, the same year that Gilmour was instrumental in helping the Calgary Flames win the Stanley Cup.

Granted, Larionov was 29 years old, and had put together a rather impressive career in the Russian league before finally earning his freedom on joining the Vancouver Canucks, but so bloody what. Compared to Doug Gilmour, who is just three years younger, he just doesn’t measure up.

In 88-89 Gilmour won a Cup and recorded 89 points. Larionov was in Russia.
In 89-90 Gilmour had 91 points – Larionov had 44 with Vancouver.
In 90-91 Gilmour had 81 points - Larionov had 34.
In 91-92 Gilmour had 87 points – Larionov had 65.
In 92-93 Gilmour had 127 points and almost won the Stanley Cup while carrying the Toronto Maple Leafs on his back while Larionov had 29 points with Lugano of the Swiss league.
In 93-94 Gilmour had 111 points with the Leafs – Larionov had 56 with San Jose.
In 94-95, the strike year, Gilmour had 33 points in 44 games while Larionov had 24 points in 33 games.

It wasn’t until 95-96 that Larionov actually had more points than Gilmour, but it was just one more, 72 to 73.

After that, Larionov played on a Detroit team that won consecutive Stanley Cups, but Gilmour had 82 points in 96-97 while Larionov, playing on a power-house only had 54 points.

In 1997-98 when Detroit won another Cup, Larionov had 47 points, while Gilmour had 53 with New Jersey.

I’m actually getting tired of listing these stats and to tell you the truth, there’s no use continuing because to finish out their careers, there wasn’t much to choose point wise between Gilmour and Larionov.

The only difference was that Larionov won another Stanley Cup with Detroit in 2002, but I ask you, who in their right mind could allow Larionov into the Hall before Gilmour?

Some might argue that Gilmour played six more season in the NHL so that’s why his over-all stats are that much better. But head to head in the NHL there was no comparison.

I'm sure there are some of you out there claiming you don't measure a player by points alone, but who would you rather have protecting a lead, checking the opposing teams best player or standing up for a team mate?

Gilmour scored, he checked, he was a team leader and he was tough as nails. And don’t give me the bullshit that he’ll eventually get his turn, he just has to wait, because that system blows after you read all the stats I’ve just provided.

And forget about Larionov’s accomplishments in the Russian league and World Championships and the Olympics because the Russians had no competition back then.

There’s nothing to the game of hockey that Igor Larionov provided compared to Doug Gilmour. If anything, he contributed significantly less.

And you know what? I'm not necessarily saying that Doug Gilmour belongs in the Hall, but if Larionov does, then Gilmour should have a red carpet placed in front of him.

Those who vote should forget about patting themselves on the back and being progressive for inducting the Russian guy, and be ashamed of themselves for making a farce of the entire of process.

End of story.