Top 10 Reasons why Mats Sundin isn't a Hall of Famer

[b3GS]

THN.com Top 10: Reasons why Mats Sundin isn't a Hall of Famer


by Brian Costello
Sundin is a consistent player, but here's why he isn't a Hall of Famer.

Some media outlets have referred to the indecisive Mats Sundin as an automatic Hall of Famer, regardless of what he decides to do with his hockey career.

So while Sundin dithers on what to do next season, here are 10 reasons why he won't make the Hall of Fame three years after his retirement. There might be 20 reasons why he will make the Hall some day, but some members of the selection committee will reject him for these flaws:

10. Has never led his team to great heights.

9. Has just 16 more points (1,321) than games played (1,305) during his 17-season career. Very good, but not great.

8. He never posted a 50-goal season and had just one 100-point season. Pavel Bure had two 60-goal seasons and two more with 58 and 59 and he's an outsider.

7. His 1,321 career regular season points are impressive, but not good enough. Adam Oates has been rejected two straight induction years and he retired with 1,420 points. Same with Doug Gilmour and his 1,414 points.

6. His 555 career regular season goals are impressive, but not good enough. Dino Ciccarelli has 608 and he has been rebuffed and Dave Andreychuk (640) won't get in when he's first-time eligible in 2009.

5. Has averaged less than a point per game in the playoffs in his career.

4. Has never been a first-team all-star. (He has been a second-teamer twice.)

3. Has never won an individual award.

2. Has never won a Stanley Cup - or even made it to the final.

1. Has rarely played at a level where he's considered among the top few players at his position. He has been loyal, durable, his production has been remarkably consistent, but he hasn't crossed the line between being a very, very good player and a truly exceptional player.

The THN.com Top 10 appears Wednesdays only on thehockeyenews.com.

[Fobio]

I think these are things that the man lives with every single day...you can see it in his face...but I give him props for sticking with Leafs who are not committed to winning anything...

[Mafty]

#2 and #1 for sure will stop him from being acepted

[dumpbear]

#11 He eats too much chunky soup.

[LockOut]

I don't think that not winning a cup would keep him out. It's more his team never even competing that will hold him back. And it's sad, because it's mostly the GMs that he's played for's fault. I know that this can not be proven, shouldn't even be argued or whatever, but had he had a better team around him, maybe #s 1, 2 and 5-10 MAY be different. Like I said, it isn't a strong argument, but it's something to consider... that I don't think even CAN be considered when selecting hall of famers.
I will add that I am in no way a TML fan, never have been and never will be, but I have a very objective view of the team. I think Mats is a very good player, but I don't think that he's deserving of being in the HoF.

[06Touring3]

+1 for lack of a cup keeping him out NOT being an issue...careers aren't solely defined by championships won...

however....i do agree with the rest of the list...and I am a Leafs fan

too bad relentless team loyalty isn't in the criteria for induction

[ptwonline]

Guys with long, solid careers can still get serious consideration for the HOF even if they weren't consistently near the top. For example: Dave Andreychuk will get serious consideration, and for most of his career he was a 20-30 goal scorer.

Another example: Mike Gartner. Never made the Stanley Cup Finals. Never made a post-season all-star team. Never won an NHL award. He was simply a good player and a consistent scorer for a long, long time. Hall of Famer.

Also keep in mind that Sundin has played in a predominentrly low-scoring era, so failing to score 50 goals or 100 points is not nearly a big black mark against an offensive player as it once was.

I'd say Sundin has a very good chance at making the HoF.