Home Sports Talk

Teams that made it to the finals with no HOF’s on it.

GoldenageGoldenage Posts: 3,278 ✭✭✭✭✭
edited January 14, 2023 4:56AM in Sports Talk

NFL
MLB
NBA
NHL

Are the 1985 and 1987 Philadelphia Flyers
the winners. ?

They had no HOFamers on it. Made it to 2 finals.

Doesn’t matter if they won or lost the final.

That may be the first two times that ever happened in the NHL.

Dino Ciccarelli made the HOF from the 81 North Stars. Have to check Vancouver though.

Comments

  • GoldenageGoldenage Posts: 3,278 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited January 14, 2023 4:55AM

    If the Canucks don’t have any, that means four teams that made it to the finals during Gretzky’s scoring surge only had 1 HOFamer on them.
    The 79 Rangers only had 14 year veteran Esposito on their team.

    The league from 1979-1987 was very weak with abysmal goaltending.

  • GoldenageGoldenage Posts: 3,278 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Show me some NFL, NBA, or MLB weakness like that NHL 8 year data.

  • georgebailey2georgebailey2 Posts: 1,045 ✭✭✭
    edited January 14, 2023 3:30PM

    Mark Howe is in the HHOF.

    They also had the Vezina Trophy winner (which, by that time, was awarded to the best goaltender rather than the lowest team GAA) in both seasons.

    Had Lindbergh not died, who knows?

    Kerr is extremely similar to Neely - better per game but about 70 fewer games. For Neely, the fact that he did 50 in 50 is what got him in versus Kerr.

    Propp, Tocchet and, to a lesser extent, McCrimmon, are just on the outside looking in.

    Those Flyers teams were extremely deep and were first/second in the regular season for a reason.

    If you're implying that those teams were not any good by reason of a shallow and superficial analysis, you've told me everything I need to know.

    Also, stop talking about the goaltending. Just because there was a gap in HOF careers does not mean that the goaltending got worse. It was primarily due to a period when the nature of goal scoring (size and speed of the players, stick and skate technology, the willingness to shoot high due to the improvements in goaltender equipment, and implementation of more sophisticated systems which significantly increased east-west play as opposed to north-south) improved faster than changes in goaltender technique and equipment. That's not to say there weren't any bad goaltenders, there were. However, I have watched/played enough hockey (as a goaltender) over the last 51 years to say this:
    Bernie Parent is almost like a god to me. He is a major part of my collecting focus and part of my basement is basically a shrine to him.
    He put together two of the most statistically dominant seasons of all time. I watched at least 200 of his games as they happened and re-watched quite a few of his 1967 to 1971 games on YouTube.
    If you transplanted him to today, with today's equipment and training/technique I don't think it would be a given that he'd make the NHL. I say this due to size and athleticism. I sometimes don't get the sense that people appreciate those differences.

    I have been watching a lot of 50s and 60s Stanley Cup playoff games over the past six months, with the occasional 70s, 80s and 90s games thrown in. Very interesting to see the progression.

  • dallasactuarydallasactuary Posts: 4,113 ✭✭✭✭✭

    1944 St. Louis Browns. Probably the worst team ever to win their league, but it was a very depleted league. Vern Stephens was the only player on the team you could mention as a HOF candidate without getting struck by lightning.

    This is for you @thisistheshow - Jim Rice was actually a pretty good player.
  • DarinDarin Posts: 6,300 ✭✭✭✭✭

    The 2015 Royals unless Salvy makes the HOF which I have no idea.
    Excellent defensive catcher and good power but not very selective. Terrible ob%

    DISCLAIMER FOR BASEBAL21
    In the course of every human endeavor since the dawn of time the risk of human error has always been a factor. Including but not limited to field goals, 4th down attempts, or multiple paragraph ramblings on a sports forum authored by someone who shall remain anonymous.
  • GoldenageGoldenage Posts: 3,278 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @georgebailey2 said:
    Mark Howe is in the HHOF.

    Lol. Totally forgot about him.
    Took him I’d say 15 years to get in so
    I lost track of him.

    Tim Kerr was no Cam Neely.

    1975 Flyers vs 1985 Flyers

    4 games to 1 for 1975

    Not even close .

    Parent is the difference.

  • GoldenageGoldenage Posts: 3,278 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @georgebailey2 said:
    Mark Howe is in the HHOF.

    Lol. Totally forgot about him.
    Took him I’d say 15 years to get in so
    I lost track of him.

    Tim Kerr was no Cam Neely.

    1975 Flyers vs 1985 Flyers

    4 games to 1 for 1975

    Not even close .

    Parent is the difference.

  • GoldenageGoldenage Posts: 3,278 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Bernie told me face to face that Jacques Plante was the best ever.

    He said it in a way that no one was even close. I agree, but Bernie was somewhat close in my opinion.

    Very underrated goalie.
    Boston should have kept him but I love Cheevers too.

    Toronto should have kept him also.

  • GoldenageGoldenage Posts: 3,278 ✭✭✭✭✭

    From 1980-1986 goalies should have gone to the butterfly that Glenn Hall invented in the 60’s because with the new stick technology pucks were coming at them much faster.

    Patrick Roy finally figured it out and other goalies followed his success and goaltending got better.

  • GoldenageGoldenage Posts: 3,278 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited January 16, 2023 3:03AM

    As great as Ken Dryden was, his biggest nemesis was Reg Leach.

    Leach had that heavy 70’s stick, but he cut it real short to give him more speed on his “swing” or shot. That’s why Leach was a “rifle”, because his stick was lighter.

    I believe they started making lighter better sticks for the NHL only around 1978 or 1979.

  • coolstanleycoolstanley Posts: 2,453 ✭✭✭✭✭

    1989 San Francisco Giants

    Terry Bradshaw was AMAZING!!

    Ignore list -Basebal21

  • dallasactuarydallasactuary Posts: 4,113 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @coolstanley said:
    1989 San Francisco Giants

    Gray area. He got traded before the postseason, but Goose Gossage was on that team.

    This is for you @thisistheshow - Jim Rice was actually a pretty good player.
  • coolstanleycoolstanley Posts: 2,453 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @dallasactuary said:

    @coolstanley said:
    1989 San Francisco Giants

    Gray area. He got traded before the postseason, but Goose Gossage was on that team.

    Yeah, but he didnt pitch very much that year, being it was toward the end of his career. And like you stated, he didn't pitch during the postseason.

    Terry Bradshaw was AMAZING!!

    Ignore list -Basebal21

  • coinkatcoinkat Posts: 22,769 ✭✭✭✭✭

    1945 Chicago Cubs... some truly great players... Stan Hack, Phil Cavarretta, Bill Nicholson and Andy Pafko but no Hall of Famers unless I am missing someone... Billy Hermann was no longer a Cub by that time

    Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.

  • dallasactuarydallasactuary Posts: 4,113 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @coinkat said:
    1945 Chicago Cubs... some truly great players... Stan Hack, Phil Cavarretta, Bill Nicholson and Andy Pafko but no Hall of Famers unless I am missing someone... Billy Hermann was no longer a Cub by that time

    You're correct, no HOFers. One of the great players on that team - not in 1945, but earlier - that you didn't mention was Lon Warneke. And I thought Warneke was in the HOF. And I think Stan Hack should be.

    This is for you @thisistheshow - Jim Rice was actually a pretty good player.
  • coinkatcoinkat Posts: 22,769 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I agree with your Stan Hack comment- I should have mentioned Warneke and even Paul Derringer- but his best seasons were with the Reds

    Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.

  • MaywoodMaywood Posts: 1,891 ✭✭✭✭✭

    The 2016 Cleveland Indians lost to the Chicago Cubs in the 10th inning of game seven. Who are these guys?? I probably watched over 100 games that season, including every Playoff and WS game, while even attending a couple games and there are names on the roster I don't remember after only six years!!!

    Maybe the only guy that even has a remote chance of getting into the MLB HOF is manager Terry Francona.

    2016 Cleveland Indians Roster:
    49 Austin Adams
    37 Cody Allen
    56 Cody Anderson
    51 Shawn Armstrong
    47 Trevor Bauer
    59 Carlos Carrasco
    62 Joba Chamberlain
    52 Mike Clevinger
    65 Joe Colon
    57 Kyle Crockett
    44 Ross Detwiler
    66 Perci Garner
    33 Tom Gorzelanny
    58 T.J. House
    48 Tommy Hunter
    28 Corey Kluber
    53 Jeff Manship
    34 Zach McAllister
    54 Ryan Merritt
    24 Andrew Miller
    50 Shawn Morimando
    61 Dan Otero
    62 Adam Plutko
    31 Danny Salazar
    27 Bryan Shaw
    43 Josh Tomlin
    38 Chris Gimenez
    10 Yan Gomes
    45 Adam Moore
    55 Roberto Pérez
    36 Jesús Aguilar
    9 Erik González
    22 Jason Kipnis
    12 Francisco Lindor
    1 Michael Martinez
    26 Mike Napoli
    11 José Ramírez
    41 Carlos Santana
    4 Juan Uribe
    35 Abraham Almonte
    23 Michael Brantley
    6 Marlon Byrd
    8 Lonnie Chisenhall
    7 Collin Cowgill
    4 Coco Crisp
    20 Rajai Davis
    6 Brandon Guyer
    30 Tyler Naquin

  • dallasactuarydallasactuary Posts: 4,113 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Lindor and Ramirez don't even have a remote chance at the HOF?

    This is for you @thisistheshow - Jim Rice was actually a pretty good player.
  • MaywoodMaywood Posts: 1,891 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @dallasactuary said: Lindor and Ramirez don't even have a remote chance at the HOF?

    In a word, no.

    In the present day watered down HOF they might get consideration but I really don't believe either should be voted in based on what they have done thus far in their careers.

  • daltexdaltex Posts: 3,486 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Maywood said:
    @dallasactuary said: Lindor and Ramirez don't even have a remote chance at the HOF?

    In a word, no.

    In the present day watered down HOF they might get consideration but I really don't believe either should be voted in based on what they have done thus far in their careers.

    Two different things: in 1973 Reggie Jackson shouldn't have been voted in based on what he had done so far. Etc., etc., etc. If Aaron Judge were to be abducted by aliens, there is no chance he gets to the HoF. Of active players younger than 35 I think only Trout and Kershaw make it if they never lay again. Many more will eventually make it, of course.

  • dallasactuarydallasactuary Posts: 4,113 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Maywood said:
    @dallasactuary said: Lindor and Ramirez don't even have a remote chance at the HOF?

    In a word, no.

    In the present day watered down HOF they might get consideration but I really don't believe either should be voted in based on what they have done thus far in their careers.

    Well, no, but they're both maybe halfway through their careers. In the present day watered down HOF they are both 100% slam dunks; in the HOF we wish we had I'd put Ramirez's chances at 50%+ already, and Lindor not that far behind. In any event, to say "who are these guys" when "these guys" include two players with 10 top-10 MVP finishes between them (and both did it in the year in question) just seemed very odd to me.

    This is for you @thisistheshow - Jim Rice was actually a pretty good player.
  • daltexdaltex Posts: 3,486 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @dallasactuary said:

    @Maywood said:
    @dallasactuary said: Lindor and Ramirez don't even have a remote chance at the HOF?

    In a word, no.

    In the present day watered down HOF they might get consideration but I really don't believe either should be voted in based on what they have done thus far in their careers.

    Well, no, but they're both maybe halfway through their careers. In the present day watered down HOF they are both 100% slam dunks; in the HOF we wish we had I'd put Ramirez's chances at 50%+ already, and Lindor not that far behind. In any event, to say "who are these guys" when "these guys" include two players with 10 top-10 MVP finishes between them (and both did it in the year in question) just seemed very odd to me.

    Again and again and again, the HoF hasn't been watered down in recent years. The BBWAA has always had high standards, even if they miss from time to time by electing David Ortiz or Catfish Hunter, but the various committees have always been a crapshoot.

    It's easy to say that looking at last year. Mark Teixeira fell off the ballot (first year) while the demonstrably inferior Gil Hodges went in via committee:

    https://stathead.com/tiny/DuDP8

    Hodges' seven years of .467 managing shouldn't move the needle, even though his trouble was more poor players than poor managing.

    Similarly, Tim Hudson fell off the ballot (second year) while the vastly inferior Jim Kaat was chosen, again, by the committee.

    https://stathead.com/tiny/VLNZN

    And if it was only the likes of Hodges and Kaat getting in lately where it had been reserved to the likes of Mays, Aaron, Seaver previously then I'd agree, but let's go all the way back to 1946. We're only eleven years in, and only Rogers Hornsby and Kennesaw Mountain Landis had been enshrined from 1940-44. Now the rules were different then, and I'm not sure how a player qualified for either ballot, but there were two BBWAA ballots, a nominating ballot and a final ballot of the top 20 nominees. (FWIW, not only has every player on that final ballot since been enshrined, but also the next seven and eighteen more down the line). To pick almost at random, Jimmy Foxx wasn't selected as a finalist, but the committee chose Tommy McCarthy, which makes enshrining Harold Baines but letting Miguel Tejada off the ballot in 2019 look like an act of genius.

    To forestall any argument, here is the comparison between Foxx and McCarthy:

    https://stathead.com/tiny/1O2HJ

    My thesis is that brining in the likes of Kaat, Hodges, Baines, Smith, and Morris is really no worse than many of the other committee selections over the years. That vastly inferior players are chosen by the committees ever since the beginning. That the committees should meet no more often than once in five years, and largely to consider people whose contributions lie largely off the field. Candidates could include Curt Flood, Tommy John, and Terry Francona. There are a few deserving players who have been overlooked, but I'm willing to accept no Bobby Grich in in exchange for keeping many of the committee entries out.

    Note that I do understand that this is likely off topic.

  • daltexdaltex Posts: 3,486 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Maywood said:
    The 2016 Cleveland Indians lost to the Chicago Cubs in the 10th inning of game seven. Who are these guys?? I probably watched over 100 games that season, including every Playoff and WS game, while even attending a couple games and there are names on the roster I don't remember after only six years!!!

    Maybe the only guy that even has a remote chance of getting into the MLB HOF is manager Terry Francona.

    Based on likely career arc, is the most likely Cub from that series Jon Lester? Rizzo, Bryant, Baez, Schwarber, and Contreras all seem to be arcing far below that level. Rizzo is the only one of them who reached 30 WAR by age 30, but has only 5 the last two years and has only a projected .765 OPS this year, which doesn't scream HoF 1B.

  • MaywoodMaywood Posts: 1,891 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited January 21, 2023 7:14AM

    Sure, I know who Ramirez and Lindor. Maybe you missed this part of the post: and there are names on the roster I don't remember after only six years. But I digress and you win as usual.

Sign In or Register to comment.