Results 21 to 30 of 64
02-11-2013, 09:21 PM #21
That Suter cross-check was nasty business. He's just lucky that Gretzky's head didn't collapse on the boards, as Gretz hit the ice first. Gretzky could easily have been in a wheelchair being fed by a slingshot, had his head hit the boards.
Suter was, Is, and always will remain a Stick-hack Bum.
02-12-2013, 12:35 PM #22
Agree very much.
One thing that I would point out, the Oilers (and then the Kings) did a better job of placing guys on the ice with Gretzky to deal with some of the cheap shots. Semenko was paid to beat the tar out of anyone would looked at Gretzky the wrong way. McSorley too (which is why he was part of the trade). Mario never had that. With his size... he was a more capable of bouncing guys off him (I met Mario a few years ago, and despite being retired for many years - he was still huge. I never realized how big the man really was) but you can only take so much abuse, no matter how big you are.
Gretzky, no doubt, was never quite the same player after the Suter hit. The fact that it came during a goal celebration.... and not even a cheap shot during play makes it all that more sickening.
02-12-2013, 12:55 PM #23
There is some totally biased blasphemy in here! Let me set the record straight on a few points that are missing the mark badly...
Eric Lindros > Milan Lucic
Eric Lindros > Tomas Holmstrom
Eric Lindros > Dave Schultz
Eric Lindros > Jeff Odgers
Eric Lindros > either Bialowis brother
Eric Lindros > every other goon/enforcer he is being insultingly compared to here.
He was a much better skater and puck handler than he is being given credit for here, and being compared to 4th-line goons is beyond an insult.
02-12-2013, 01:13 PM #24
Edited cause I was mean
When you talk dominate in the history of the NHL, the standard is Gordie Howe when it comes to it all. Lindros cannot even sit in the shade of the shadow that Gordie Howe casts, let alone walk behind him.
Funny how you didn't mention Gordie Howe in the names above, in your bias for Lindros, cause I certainly mentioned him, why is that?
Lindros was more a controversial figure because of his parents meddling and his narcissistic attitude, not because of what he did on the ice. Flash in the pan, the NHL has seen plenty of them.
Last edited by centrehice; 02-12-2013 at 01:15 PM.
02-12-2013, 01:37 PM #25
Please, be mean. I can take it. Why you feel the need to be mean in a simple difference of opinion, when I've never said or done anything negatively towards you in my years on this site, confuses me. But hey, I hate myself and my life these days, so taking insults from someone I've never had beef with seems par for the course. Have at 'er.
Eric Lindros was a dominating player. The most dominating? I don't know, but I know I saw him rise to the top of the world as a hockey player, and in his prime, he could do it all, so why everyone now wants to talk about him like he was some 3rd line bum who didn't accomplish anything, is ludicrous. You don't have to like the guy, heck, I never did much, but his level of dominance was memorable, far moreso than what I've seen from the likes of, say, Tomas Holmstrom.
The reason I won't mention Gordie Howe is because he is nothing more than a picture on cards and a bunch of statistics that I can look up to me. Everyone talks about how great he was, and his numbers speak for themselves, but anything beyond a numerical analysis, I'd be making it up. This is about to be an argument pitting different generations against each other, and there's never a clear answer when arguing over who was better between Howe, Orr, Gretzky, Lemieux, other, etc. It's likely that you'll tell me that the players I didn't get to see play were the best, if only to try and win the argument on the basis of something I can't speak about, while making me feel frustrated and disconnected from the history of the game, or wishing that I had had that chance. In other words, straying from the original discussion about Lindros' dominance, which, I will add, could very well have exceeded Howe's if he had been given a chance to play in the 50s and 60s when his competition would have been smaller, slower, and the goaltending a far cry from what he had to deal with (goalies with oversized equipment, protective crease rules, and styles that actually worked, like the butterfly). We'll never know, will we? And I have nothing but respect for Howe and Orr and other players that hung up the skates before I was born. How can I be expected to promote their dominance, though? And, therefore, are only fans who have been around since the 50s qualified to participate in this discussion?
I'm not even arguing that Lindros was the most dominant. He was a dominating, big player with lots of skill, and most guys were afraid of him, and that's not an exaggeration. "Dominating" is a relative term, though, and I might be inclined to say that Mario Lemieux could single-handedly dominate a game better than any other player I have ever had the chance to watch.
Last edited by ravens_creed; 02-12-2013 at 02:12 PM.
02-12-2013, 01:57 PM #26
He's not a 3rd line bum, but he simply does not belong in the Hall, and neither do Cam Neely, Bernie Federko, Rod Langway or Clark Gillies.
I am fair to everyone here. It's the Hall Of Fame, not the Hall of Popularity. Guys like Damphouse with 1,200 points, Verbeek over 500 coals, and Housley, the 1st American Defenseman to score over 1,000 points are all by passed because of reduced popularity.
I have a huge problem with handing over the keys to the Hall to anyone that is not deserving, and Lindros is in that group.
Housley should have been in the Hall, long before Leetch, and he still isn't.
Last edited by centrehice; 02-12-2013 at 02:00 PM.
02-12-2013, 02:08 PM #27
I took too long to edit my original post. The first one (the one I wanted to change) must have been up for too long. Dammit!
02-12-2013, 02:51 PM #28
02-12-2013, 03:15 PM #29Bucket: Hidden Content
LF: Ovechkin and 2012-13 Artifacts # /125/75//15/8/5/3/1
2008-09 Black Diamond Quad JS Base, Gold and Onyx.
02-12-2013, 03:43 PM #30
Mario Lemieux in my opinion, but Lindros' 1.13 ppg (19th all time) and 1398 pim's, large stature and hard hitting play certainly made him as complete a player as any and a possible nomination for the title I suppose.
"poor man's Lucic ' made laugh histerically; and I like Lucic and his .59 ppg. I think the only thing Lucic does better than Lindros would be fight.