2012 Hall Of Fame Inductees

[JR Boucicaut 3797]

Joe Sakic, Mats Sundin, Adam Oates and Pavel Bure get into the HHOF this year - Brendan Shanahan did not.

Discuss -

[dsjunior1388 81]

Oates is long overdue. Passing skills rivaled only by a handful of people.

[Dr. Funk 6]

Four deserving guys. Surprised by the Shanahan exclusion, though; he's also extremely deserving. I hope/trust that it's just a numbers game (four per year) and not related to his (perceived or actual) inconsistent performance as NHL discipline czar.

[team50 20]

I might have put Shanahan in over Pavel Bure. I have not looked at the stats, but longevity, points (season and playoffs) and Stanley Cup victories I think goes to Shanahan.

[RadioGaGa 162]

Hard to argue with any of those 4...or any combination that would have included Shanny as well. Sakic was a must for this year, IMO...but....Why no Pat Burns???? He should have went in before he died! I guess they figure...he's dead...no rush now. Seems wrong to me.

Looking at the list of those who were considered. I would have never remembered that Cujo was NEVER an All Star!

Seems like all these guys are from fairly recent memory. Are there no players from the 60's-80's worthy to go in...or do you lose your eligibilty after so many years?

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/feature/?id=53192

[Dr. Funk 6]

These decisions are so tough; I don't envy the committee members at all. Numbers-wise, Bure (437 goals in 702 games, 0.623 goals/game - fifth in league history) isn't exactly blown away by Mike Bossy (573 in 752, 0.762). I understand that comparing guys who played in different eras is always fraught with peril, though.

Not advocating for Bure over Shanahan, but it's tough to continue keeping out a guy with those stats - particularly when Bure was one of the NHL's most electric players while playing in the "trap era."

Also, totally agree with Pat Burns being a worthy inductee. Fred Shero's wait should be over at some point, as well.

[chippa13 1844]

Bure deserves it just for being the only guy who could find the net in Florida for those years. He was such an exciting player to watch.

[BenderHockey 127]

I might catch heat for this, but in my opinion Sundin, while very good, isn't HOF material. Especially when you consider Shanahan not making it.

[goblue9280 33]

Interesting theories on the Shanny snub... everything from having a little too much ego, to the love triangle with Craig Janney's (now Shanny's) wife, to his current role as disciplinarian. Personally, I think that's all BS, considering Bure gets in this year despite his long "rumored" friendship with the russian mafia. Bottom line, Shanny should have been selected. While all deserving, his resume tops 3 of the 4 inductees.

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nhl-puck-daddy/why-brendan-shanahan-snubbed-hockey-hall-fame-150754149--nhl.html

[Gr8erade 1]

They can only put in a maximum of 4 players per year and these four are deserving. Sakic is a no-brainer, Sundin was a dominant center in the NHL for a long time and has an unbelievable international portfolio too, Oates was one of the best set-up men of all time, and Bure was a player who I loved watching every time he stepped on the ice - even though he was a Canuck! If you don't know that, you didn't watch a lot of hockey in the 90s, or you're incredibly biased.

I don't see not making the cut the first time around as a snub, especially since they only can take 4 and there is a pretty deep pool of deserving players still out there. Shanahan is defintely one of them. I think a couple of years down the road when the Hall starts looking at the players who came in during the mid-to-late 90s and there are few so obviously worthy picks as there have been in the past few years that they will go back and put the rest of the deserving in.

I think they just keep missing the boat with Pat Burns though.

[goblue9280 33]

If you don't know that, you didn't watch a lot of hockey in the 90s, or you're incredibly biased.

I guess that goes for Bob McKenzie, Ken Campbell and Pierre Lebrun as well... all of whom wrote that the HHOF blew it by not including Shanahan?

Like I said, all are hall worthy, but Shanny has a better resume than 3 of the 4.

[Gr8erade 1]

I guess that goes for Bob McKenzie, Ken Campbell and Pierre Lebrun as well... all of whom wrote that the HHOF blew it by not including Shanahan?

Like I said, all are hall worthy, but Shanny has a better resume than 3 of the 4.

They will all be in. They could just take 4. But my guess is that you'd have taken Sundin over Shanahan on the first ballot. I think you can argue it either way.

For instance, do you think Sundin wouldn't have had more cups than Shanahan if Sundin had stayed with Quebec/Colorado instead of going to the Leafs and if Shanahan hadn't ended up on the Detroit All Stars? Sundin put up points when he was the only real threat on the Leafs for a long, long time. Shanahan never carried a team by himself, at least not that I recall. My memories of watching in the 90s was that Shanahan was one of several excellent power forwards, Neely, Tkachuk, John LeClair, Wendel Clark, Owen Nolan, Eric Lindros, Rick Tocchet, Kevin Stevens for a period. Not all of them are Hall of Famers, but at the time, by my recollection, I'd have probably said you could interchange one for the other. Shanahan did it for longer than any of them, and on some excellent teams with good supporting casts of players. Sometimes what separates one player from another is pure luck of where you happen to be playing.

Bure was simply exciting, and I don't recall too many who I would compare to him at the time he was playing.

With only 4 slots, you can nickle and dime it to death. They can only take 4 at a time. I can't argue against the ones they took. Shanahan will go in next year. I don't see how that's blowing it.

[goblue9280 33]

Shanahan never carried a team by himself, at least not that I recall.

No, he never needed to do that... if your top power forward needs to carry the team, then your team has issues. However, Shanny was the missing piece to the Wings first two cups. The were swept in the finals in 95, and then physically pounded in the conference finals in 96. The wings were extremely skilled up front, but were getting physically manhandled by teams in the playoffs. Shanahan was instrumental in changing that, so I would absolutely challenge the notion that Shanahan was simply lucky for having been on the Red Wings "all-star" teams... and Scotty Bowman would agree with me.

In the grand scheme of things does it matter that Shanny got snubbed? No, he'll be in next year... and the guys that got picked this year were eventually going to get it. However, the majority opinion out there is that he deserved to be in this class. Worth noting, even the NHL.com article prior to the announcement called him a "no-brainer for the class of 2012".

[Gr8erade 1]

Pat Burns would seem to be a no-brainer too, but they can't seem to get that one right either. In the end, you're talking about what? 18 people deciding who gets in and when. it is a flawed process. But you really can't argue against who they did let in. At least not this year.

Here's one for you, what if they had plucked Keith Tkachuk from Winnipeg in 1996 instead of Brendan Shanahan asking out of Hartford (Tkachuk had better stats at that time, by the way), would he have been the same missing piece for the Red Wings? What about John LeClair? All very similar players statistically at that time. What kind of career would they have had if they played 9 seasons in Detroit with that supporting cast? Is Tkachuk or Leclair a slam-dunk first ballot hall of famer in your mind? I think that both of them could end up in the Hall of Fame (especially since they're Americans), but I wouldn't say either of them are slam dunk first ballots though. Leclair obviously wasn't, and has been waiting 3 years already. So why is Shanahan? I think because he had the added benefit of playing 9 years on the Wings with a roster full of all stars. Does he get in the Hall of Fame if he stayed in Hartford and moved to Carolina instead? Don't know. Probably. But probably not on the first ballot either.

[goblue9280 33]

All very similar players statistically at that time. What kind of career would they have had if they played 9 seasons in Detroit with that supporting cast?

So now we are playing what if's in order to determine who is hall worthy? My response would be who knows how Tkachuk or LeClair would have fared on the Wings... there's much more that goes into building a championship team than simply picking guys that meet statistical standards. What we do know is Shanahan was a major piece of 3 Stanley Cup teams. 2nd all time career goals for LW, 3rd all time GWG all positions, 12 season with 30+ goals (majority occurring in the dead puck era). Tkachuk and LeClair are simply not comparable... one had over 100 fewer career goals, the other, 250.

Would Shanny be a 1st ballot HOFer had he never come to the Wings and not won a cup? Yes, I believe he would have. Still, that's such a ridiculous question, "what if he hadn't done what he did". And another thing, this notion that he won cups on "all-star" teams, I wouldn't call the 97 or 98 wings teams "all-star" teams, only the 2002 team. Look at the 1998 roster fegodsakes, you're telling me that's an all-star roster? With Kozlov and Doug Brown as two of your top 5 scoring forwards? This notion that somehow you shouldn't get extra credit for being a part of 3 championship teams just boggles my mind.

[Gr8erade 1]

Except shanahan is apparently NOT a first ballot hall of famer, according to those who count, the hall of fame. And I'm saying I think he got some extra credit for being on those teams. Otherwise, his career is actually not all that different than Keith Tkachuk's.

[Monty22 832]

Interesting theories on the Shanny snub... everything from having a little too much ego, to the love triangle with Craig Janney's (now Shanny's) wife, to his current role as disciplinarian. Personally, I think that's all BS, considering Bure gets in this year despite his long "rumored" friendship with the russian mafia. Bottom line, Shanny should have been selected. While all deserving, his resume tops 3 of the 4 inductees.

http://sports.yahoo....54149--nhl.html

I know it's not the case, but I pretend the snub was due to his putting one of the final nails in the coffin of the Hartford Whalers by pubicly asking out in 96.

[goblue9280 33]

And I'm saying I think he got some extra credit for being on those teams.

As he should, they were part of his career accomplishments. If he isn't allowed to take credit for winning three Stanley Cups, does that mean Yzerman and Lidstrom aren't allowed extra credit as well? You mentioned Sundin's international career, why does Sundin get credit for being a part of great, championship Swedish teams?

You can call me biased again, but the fact is (as I've already indicated) there are numerous, respected (unbiased) hockey journalists/analysts/coaches/GM's/players out there also commenting on the Shanny snub... just google it. He's not part of this class, but as I previously said (and the original article I linked indicated), it probably has to do with some off-ice reasons as his playing accomplishments best 3 of the 4 inductees.

[Gr8erade 1]

It is exactly what I'm saying. One of the reasons he's considered by many to be a snubbed first balloter is because he was part of some very good teams that ended up winning Cups. This would set him apart from say, Keith Tkachuk, who likely isn't going to get discussed as a first ballot candidate. And that's despite having very similar stats. Divide out goals per game for instance, and Tkachuk's goals per game is actually slightly higher. Tkachuk scored his 500th goal in fewer games than Shanahan did. They scored their 1000th points in essentially the same amount of time (Shanahan had his in 4 games faster). Tkachuk had 200 fewer penalty minutes, but played 300 fewer games. These are two players who were really very, very comparable by the numbers. The difference is the Cups. And that has a lot to do with what team you happen to play for.

All I'm saying is that if the Red Wings took Keith Tkachuk instead of Brendan Shanahan, maybe he's the one mentioned to be the first ballot snub.