Kukla's Korner Hockey
Next entry: Values of Hockey
Previous entry: Anaheim Hands Over Portland to Buffalo
Glenn Anderson and the HHOF
by Alanah McGinley on 06/10/08 at 02:10 PM ET
Comments (7)
Yesterday I posted reference to Joe Pelletier’s list of potential HHOF candidates this year. Today, David Staples at the Edmonton Journal took issue with Joe’s remarks about Glenn Anderson, whom Joe inferred might not be a good candidate because of his personal life history. Staples’ response:
Anderson was an offbeat guy, not the best interview, not a favourite of the media. He also had a major issue with child support payments, which will make some people think less of him as a man and certainly as a father.
Now, I would never argue Glenn Anderson belongs in the Fathers Hall of Fame. He has had his struggles in that regard and he has to live with his failings and, one would hope, make amends as he can.
But other players have black marks on their personal lives, from problems related to cocaine use to allegations of having sex with minors, from issues of tax evasion to just being a plain old jerk. If the committee investigated every player thoroughly, it would likely find some blemish on every man, some more serious than the problems caused by Anderson, some less serious.
But should issues of morality really be the deciding factor with Anderson? That doesn’t seem consistent or fair.
It’s a good question in general: How important should one’s personal life be when it comes to entering the HHOF?
Filed in: NHL Talk | KK Hockey | Permalink
Tags: glenn+anderson,
Comments
No, I don’t think that Joe personally feels Anderson should be excluded (I suppose I worded it wrong), but as you say, he suggests (“infer” is wrong?) that the Committee itself would take that into account. Which I suppose is what Staples is responding to as well… wondering how much should the HOF take a player’s personal life into account?
Posted by Alanah McGinley from British Columbia on 06/10/08 at 02:38 PM ET
The same nonsense that’s keeping Anderson out is keeping Ciccarelli out as well - although, a better comparison would be what the NFL has put Art Monk through before he was finally elected this year. Both Dino and Glenn are highly deserving, it seems to me that people are too busy looking for excuses to not put them in instead.
Posted by HockeyJoe from NY on 06/10/08 at 03:56 PM ET
Harold Ballard is in the Hall of Fame. I think that ends this argument.
Posted by Chemmy on 06/10/08 at 03:58 PM ET
Glenn Anderson without a doubt belongs in the HHOF, and the fact he isnt in it yet is beyond pathetic.
He was a great player, and probably has more points in his career than half the players in the HHOF.
Posted by PuckHound61 from Speckville USA on 06/10/08 at 04:29 PM ET
… wondering how much should the HOF take a player’s personal life into account?
I’d say that a player’s personal life is another one of those gray areas that life seems to be full of… my suggested approach would be to ignore it until you can’t ignore it. And, yeah, that would mean everyone takes the gray area and transforms it into a black-and-white line drawn in a different place.
If I had the pen I would absolutely draw the line to exclude the Richard Specks of the world, for example—an easy decision. I would draw it to exclude the Pete Roses—more controversial, I presume. I certainly wouldn’t draw it to exclude the Glenn Andersons.
Re semantics… The way I always understood it was this: when I’m speaking, I imply; when I’m listening, I infer. But dictionary.com’s definition #4 for infer is “to hint; imply; suggest.” So what the hell do I know?
Posted by BobTheZee on 06/10/08 at 07:23 PM ET
Bob, that’s what I always understood, as well.
Regardless, on the topic at hand, I don’t see how Anderson isn’t a HOFer. His regular season numbers are borderline, but his playoff numbers should really put him over the top and seal the deal. The only thing against him is that there are a few guys that clearly belong ahead of him.
By all accounts, Ty Cobb was perhaps the worst human being to ever walk the earth, but by all accounts he’s also one of the greatest ball players, too.
The HOF is about what you’ve done for the game of hockey. So, the only time a character flaw should figure into the discussion is if it directly harms the game. For example, let’s say Todd Stillwuzzi were a HOF talent. His poor character has directly reflected poorly on the sport of hockey, so for that reason, it would make sense to keep him out of the Hall.
Posted by Nathan from the scoresheet! on 06/11/08 at 07:56 AM ET
Add a Comment
Please limit embedded image or media size to 575 pixels wide.
Add your own avatar by joining Kukla's Korner, or logging in and uploading one in your member control panel.
Captchas bug you? Join KK or log in and you won't have to bother.
Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.
Most Recent Blog Posts
Video-Shane Lehman, Always A Hockey Player
Making Peace At The Winter Classic
You Have A 2 1/2 Hour Window To Do What You Do
About KK Hockey
Paul Kukla founded Kukla’s Korner in 2005 and the site has since become the must-read site on the ‘net for all the latest happenings around the NHL.
From breaking news to in-depth stories around the league, KK Hockey is updated with fresh stories all day long and will bring you the latest news as quickly as possible.
Email Paul anytime at .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)
When learning from experts it’s best to learn personally from them, or from their blog. We can provide that with poker lessons blog, your home to learn poker personally.
Do you get shocked from the luck in the game of poker? Stop getting shocked and start being a Poker Shoker
Make extra cash while playing online poker. Rakeback is free and comes with rake races.
Kukla’s Korner is always a free service for readers, but it costs some money to maintain. If you’re ever in a position to donate a few dollars to help out, we’d be very appreciative.
Alanah, I’m no English major, but I think it would be more accurate to say that you inferred from Joe’s article that Anderson might not be a good candidate because of his personal background.
Dorky semantics aside, I don’t think that Joe implied that Anderson was a bad choice in his opinion. All I took from the blog was that Joe felt that the selection committee would take Anderson’s personal blemishes into account when deciding who to induct into the HHOF.
Posted by Nathan from the scoresheet! on 06/10/08 at 02:34 PM ET