The Puck Stops Here
Next entry: Luc Robitaille's Hall Of Fame Case
Previous entry: Brett Hull's Hall Of Fame Case
Brian Leetch’s Hall Of Fame Case
by PuckStopsHere on 06/29/09 at 02:12 AM ET
Comments (10)
This is the third Hall of Fame case I am making this year. Here is Steve Yzerman’s case and here is Brett Hull’s.
I am comparing them to my Hall of Fame standards using the questions Bill James asks about potential baseball Hall of Famers. I think this is an insightful group of questions that quickly hits at the heart of what makes a player a Hall of Famer
1. Was he ever regarded as the best player in baseball? Did anybody, while he was active, ever suggest that he was the best player in baseball
No. I cannot make any reasonable argument that people ever seriously called Brian Leetch the best player in hockey.
2. Was he the best player on his team?
For the majority of his career Leetch was the best player on the Rangers. This run was interrupted in the early 90’s when Mark Messier came to town, but as Messier aged Leetch regained this position and held it into the early 2000’s
3. Was he the best player in baseball at his position? Was he the best player in the league at his position?
Yes. For a time Leetch was the best defenceman in hockey. This is shown by his two Norris Trophies that he won in 1992 and 1997. He had a significant run when he was among the top defencemen in hockey. During much of the 90’s there was debate about who the best defenceman in hockey was - with Ray Bourque, Paul Coffey, Chris Chelios and Scott Stevens as other candidates - some supported Leetch for many years in that time period and others did not. Leetch was the top defenceman in the game during some of this time period.
4. Did he have an impact on a number of pennant races?
Leetch won the Conn Smythe Trophy in 1994 as the New York Rangers won the Stanley Cup. That was his most significant playoff experience. The only other time the Rangers made it to the semi-finals was 1997. Leetch was a significant contributor on many Ranger playoff teams, despite the lack of many successful years. He scored more than a point per game in his playoff career as a defenceman (97 points in 95 games) and topped out at 34 points in his Smythe year.
5. Was he a good enough player that he could continue to play regularly after passing his prime?
Leetch finished his final NHL season just after he turned 38. It was an injury plagued season with the Boston Bruins. His last successful season came two years earlier before the lockout. Having a successful year at age 36 probably qualifies him as a yes for this question, but several of his contemporaries lasted quite a bit longer.
6. Is he the very best player in baseball history who is not in the Hall of Fame?
With Yzerman and Hull already inducted this year, Leetch becomes the best player in history who is eligible.
7. Are most players who have comparable career statistics in the Hall of Fame?
He is a defenceman and as such it is harder to compare his numbers with others (as compared to forwards). His 1028 career points places him seventh all time among defencemen (Ray Bourque, Paul Coffey, Al MacInnis, Phil Housley, Larry Murphy and Denis Potvin are ahead of him). Of that group, only Housley is not in the Hall of Fame. So yes most players with comparable statistics are in the Hall.
8. Do the player’s numbers meet Hall of Fame standards?
His offensive numbers clearly do meet Hall standards.
9. Is there any evidence to suggest that the player was significantly better or worse than is suggested by his statistics?
At times Leetch was criticized for his defensive play, despite being a two time Norris Trophy winner. While he wasn’t bad defensively, there clearly were better defensive players in the league. Couple that with the fact that Leetch’s prime was during the highest scoring era in the history of the NHL and the answer to this question must be a yes.
10. Is he the best player at his position who is eligible for the Hall of Fame but not in?
Yes. I think it is clear Leetch is the best eligible defenceman.
11. How many MVP-type seasons did he have? Did he ever win an MVP award? If not, how many times was he close?
While a Norris Trophy winner must be on the radar screen for Hart Trophy voters, Leetch never seriously was considered for MVP in his career. Part of this is a bias against defencemen winning the award and part of it is his perceived lack of defensive skills. Leetch was the playoff MVP in 1994.
12. How many All-Star-type seasons did he have? How many All-Star games did he play in? Did most of the other players who played in this many go into the Hall of Fame?
Leetch appeared in nine NHL All Star Games. They were all deserved. In his rookie year he also posted All Star numbers but was not selected to the team so he could have had 10 selections. Players with this many All Star Games almost certainly make the Hall of Fame.
13. If this man were the best player on his team, would it be likely that the team could win the pennant?
Leetch was the best player on the New York Rangers when they won the 1994 Stanley Cup. Clearly that makes this answer a yes.
14. What impact did the player have on baseball history? Did he introduce any new equipment? Did he change the game in any way?
Leetch’s biggest impact was as the Conn Smythe winner when the New York Rangers won their first Stanley Cup in over 50 years. In New York circles he will go down as a legend for that. He was also a key figure in the success of the US Hockey program in the 1990’s (their biggest sustained success to date) and as such has helped grow hockey in the US markets.
15. Did the player uphold the standards of sportsmanship and character that the Hall of Fame, in its written guidelines, instructs us to consider?
Leetch was a good teammate and a positive guy to have in the clubhouse. The answer to this question is a yes. This is shown in part by his 2007 Lester Patrick Trophy win for services to hockey in the US.
Leetch is not as good a Hall of Fame candidate as Steve Yzerman or Brett Hull in that there is no case that he was ever the best player in the league. However, he was best defencemen in the game for a while and has two Norris Trophies, a Conn Smythe and a Calder Trophy to show for his NHL run. He is one of the highest scoring defencemen ever. That makes him a Hall of Famer.
Filed in: | The Puck Stops Here | Permalink
Tags: Brian+Leetch,
Comments
Brian Leetch was the established defensive star on the Rangers. He had won the Norris Trophy two years earlier.
Zubov was a bit of a surprise scoring leader on the Rangers. It was his first full season in the league and second season of his career. He was not relied upon anywhere near the level Leetch was, Zubov did not even appear in his first NHL All Star Game until 1998.
If there was any doubt about who was the best player on the Rangers between the two one only needs to look at the playoffs where Leetch had more assists than Zubov had points (23 to 19 - and that ignores Leetch’s 11 goals). It was quite clear to anybody that Leetch was the top defenceman on the team.
If argument existed it was between Leetch and Messier as to who was the best player on the team. Messier was starting to decline and was barely than a point per game player at this point. Messier was the team captain and leader, but Leetch was definitely the better player. That was clear from watching them play.
Posted by PuckStopsHere on 06/29/09 at 08:52 AM ET
That is your opinion, that is not fact.
Opinion:
1. a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty.
2. a personal view, attitude, or appraisal.
vs.
Fact
1. something that actually exists; reality; truth:
2. something known to exist or to have happened:
Dictionary.com
Posted by moore00 from the Ohio State University on 06/29/09 at 09:06 AM ET
Of course a significant part of the discussion of hockey is opinion. It has to be.
That said, it is a common (probably majority held - I never took a poll) opinion that Leetch was the best player on the 1994 Rangers.
If you don’t want to discuss opinion you are on the wrong site. You really cannot discuss hockey without opinion.
Posted by PuckStopsHere on 06/29/09 at 09:13 AM ET
Opinions are great, just not so much when they are passed off as fact.
This quote is fine:
That said, it is a common (probably majority held - I never took a poll) opinion that Leetch was the best player on the 1994 Rangers.
This one is not:
Leetch was the best player on the New York Rangers when they won the 1994 Stanley Cup. Clearly that makes this answer a yes.
Posted by moore00 from the Ohio State University on 06/29/09 at 10:24 AM ET
Of course a significant part of the discussion of hockey is opinion. It has to be.
I think what Moore00 is trying to say is that in question 13, you wrote out a statement of opinion without explaining to the reader why you think that way. Simply stating that Leetch was the best player on the team, an obvious opinion, without giving us your reasoning makes the answer incomplete.
Posted by UMFan from Colorado on 06/29/09 at 12:35 PM ET
I am not one to defend TPSH, but in writing, it is common to write an opinion in the manner of the second sentence you posted above, moore00. It is supposed to be assumed that something regarding a matter that clearly cannot have a defined answer (such as the ‘best’ player on a team) is the opinion of the author when stated as fact, although normally that sentence would include reasons that the author will go into depth about.
For instance, when one writes an expository paper, let’s use this as an example, the thesis would read something like this:
“Brian Leetch was the best player on the New York Rangers during their 1994 Stanley Cup victory due to his Defensive acumen, his running of the powerplay, and his Leadership throughout the playoffs”
(I am not saying this is true, but giving an example of an expository paper’s thesis)
The paper or article would continue with discussions of those three things and how they show that he was the best player.
So while TPSH may not always support his opinions well, it is quite obvious that he is a blogger giving an opinion.
Also, in no way do I support TPSH and his terrible blog, but only his write to blog and share his opinion as he sees fit.
Posted by NHLJeff from Boston, MA on 06/29/09 at 12:37 PM ET
UMFan said that much more simply than I was able to, so, what he said, haha.
Posted by NHLJeff from Boston, MA on 06/29/09 at 12:37 PM ET
I think what Moore00 is trying to say is that in question 13, you wrote out a statement of opinion without explaining to the reader why you think that way. Simply stating that Leetch was the best player on the team, an obvious opinion, without giving us your reasoning makes the answer incomplete.
Exactly. My biggest problem is then he will use that incomplete answer as support for other questions.
Thanks guys for writing it so much more succinctly than I.
Posted by moore00 from the Ohio State University on 06/29/09 at 12:51 PM ET
TPSH:
Much of your assertion that Brian Leetch was the best player on the NY Rangers draws upon his playoff performance in 1994. However, as you’ve asserted elsewhere, the playoffs are not any more special than the regular season and really should be incorporated into the regular season for proper analysis. So, using your standard, let’s look at potentially four of the best players for the NY Rangers in the 1993-94 season.
Below are the regular season and playoff point results for the four top regular season points getters on the NY Rangers (games-goals-assists-points):
Sergei Zubov - RS: 78-12-77-89; PO: 22-5-14-19
Mark Messier - RS: 76-26-58-84; PO: 23-12-18-30
Adam Graves - RS: 84-52-27-79; PO: 23-10-7-17
Brian Leetch - RS: 84-23-56-79; PO: 23-11-23-34
Here’s combined totals:
Sergei Zubov - 100 games, 17 goals, 91 assists, 108 points
Mark Messier - 99 games, 38 goals, 76 assists, 114 points
Adam Graves - 107 games, 62 goals, 34 assists, 96 points
Brian Leetch - 107 games, 34 goals, 79 assists, 113 points
Based on the points data I do not see how you make a runaway, obvious case that Brian Leetch was the best player on the NY Rangers in 1993-94. Adam Graves’ 52 regular season goals placed him in the top five goal scorers in the NHL that season. Combining regular season and playoffs, Leetch, Zubov and Messier all scored virtually the same number of points, but Messier and Zubov did the job in fewer games.
How about some love for Mike Richter? He only lead the league in regular season wins that year, was fourth overall in regular season shutouts and fifth in goals against average. That might merit some consideration as best player on the team.
Now, you could argue that Leetch made the post-season Second All-Star team that year, something the Mark Messier, Sergei Zubov and Mike Richter did not, which should accord Leetch a point in his favour as the best Ranger. But Adam Graves also made the Second All-Star team. We can argue that (at least for the 1993-94 regular season) Brian Leetch was the third best defenseman in the league (behind First Teamers Ray Bourque and Scott Stevens), but by that same standard we’d have to claim that Adam Graves was the second best left wing that year (behind only Brendan Shanahan).
Also, Adam Graves won the NY Rangers team award for MVP in 1993-94. According to the voters that season, Adam Graves was the best player on the Rangers, at least for the 82 games of the regular season, which you claim often has greater significance.
I’m not suggesting that Brian Leetch is not a worthy inductee for the HHOF. I, too, found him to be best eligible defenseman and in the top three eligible candidates behind only Steve Yzerman and Brett Hull.
However, you are prone to making unsupported assertions of opinion masked as fact. Using 1993-94 as a test case, you can say that Leetch was among the top defensemen in the league and among the top players on the NY Rangers without fear of contradiction. But to single him out as “the best” you need to provide more detailed support for your opinion.
Posted by Matthew McCallum from Redding, California on 06/29/09 at 07:18 PM 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.
Most Recent Blog Posts
I NOW Consider Joe Thornton A Hall Of Famer
NHL`s Opportunistic Fight With The NHLPA
Puck Daddy: Best Teams Were Pre-Lockout
About The Puck Stops Here
The Puck Stops Here was founded during the 2004/05 lockout as a place to rant about hockey. The original site contains over 1000 posts, some of which were also published on FoxSports.com.
Who am I?
A diehard hockey fan.
Why am I blogging?
I want to.
Why are you reading it?
???
Email:
Donate to Kukla’s Korner
Now I know you could make an argument that he was, but to simply put that he was is nothing more than your opinion. He wasn’t even the highest scorer on that team or even the highest D scorer (tied for 3rd with Graves, behind Messier and 10 points behind Zubov, who played six less games than Leetch.)
That is why you one of many reasons you can’t seem to make a decent argument. You often pose opinions as facts and then use those “facts” to make your argument, then act superior when we don’t agree.
Posted by moore00 from the Ohio State University on 06/29/09 at 08:37 AM ET