Quote:
Originally Posted by Igottago
If its players only, Fleury has to be there in the 3 or 4 spot. He was an incredible player for the franchise. He also obviously overcame a lot to become an elite NHLer. There's a lot of merit in that. You can think he's an idiot, I tend to think he's an idiot, but it doesn't erase his contribution to the franchise. It's a shame that people can't put his twitter nonsense aside and give him credit for what he did achieve for the Flames. If this Flames mount Rushmore was for most illuminated human beings, then yeah, he should be nowhere near it. But for hockey performance, you can't ignore what Fleury did.
|
You don’t have to ignore it to believe it’s not among the top four contributions to the franchise as a whole.
I think both the “what he overcame” argument and the cup arguments are nonsense, personally.
If what he overcame counts for something, who he became counts at least as much. And while he didn’t have control over what happened to him, he did have control over who he became.
If having a cup ring is a trump card regardless of how important the player was to the cup win, then why have Iginla there at all? A cup is a team accomplishment. It’s glorified (often for good reason, it’s extremely difficult) but average and below average players win cups too. On an individual level it doesn’t mean anything. Conn Smythe, Vezina, Hart, etc. These tell you about a player and their contributions. A cup doesn’t.