# of Hall of Famers this dynasty will produce?

[CloudConnected 0]

Neely had a sustained level of excellence? WHEN? It's not 'full career' because his career numbers are laughable for Hall selection. So it must be over a specific couple of seasons, right?

Which seasons? Neely must have been the dominant RW in the league at the time, right? No, you say? He never once was named to the First Team?

So where's this "sustained excellence" you speak of? Sure, Brett Hull was dominating the position in the early 90s...but was Neely on the second team in those years? Meanwhile, Stevens was first or second team every year for four straight from 1990 to 1993, and could have kept going had he not been injured in the 93 postseason. Argue his teammates all you want, he had more in awards and stats than Neely. It's like saying if Luongo gets injured this year, he belongs in the Hall of Fame over John Vanbiesbrouck.

Some guys get the media and fan love, and some guys don't. But the facts bear out that Stevens accomplished more than Neely.

EDIT: I didn't downgrade Neely for being the third greatest player on his team. I was pointing out that it's silly to downgrade Stevens for being arguably the second or third greatest player on his team behind Lemieux and possibly someone else when Neely is in the same sort of slot. Stevens was certainly the team's second best player in his prime, which cannot be said of Neely, who was behind Oates and Bourque.

I will say, Stevens did have two better seasons than Neely did. But again, Stevens played alongside one of the 3 best offensive players in hockey history. And if you don't think that helps along his stats at all, then you my friend are in the dark.

Also, you still can't argue his candidacy for the hall of fame because of how terrible he was the last eight years of his career. He had more bad seasons than good seasons! How can you argue him over Neely?